[House Report 107-451]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
107th Congress Rept. 107-451
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session Part 1
======================================================================
HARMFUL INVASIVE WEED CONTROL ACT OF 2002
_______
May 9, 2002.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hansen, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1462]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 1462) to require the Secretary of the Interior to
establish a program to provide assistance through States to
eligible weed management entities to control or eradicate
harmful, nonnative weeds on public and private land, having
considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment
and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Harmful Invasive Weed Control Act of
2002''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) There exists no dedicated, coordinated Federal effort to
address, control, or eradicate harmful, invasive terrestrial
weeds.
(2) Public and private land in the United States faces
unprecedented and severe stress from harmful, invasive weeds.
(3) The economic and resource value of the land is being
destroyed as harmful invasive weeds overtake native vegetation,
making the land unusable for forage and for diverse plant and
animal communities.
(4) Damage caused by harmful invasive weeds has been
estimated to run in the hundreds of millions of dollars
annually.
(5) Successfully fighting this scourge will require
coordinated action by all affected stakeholders, which may
include Federal, State, and local governments, private
landowners, and nongovernmental organizations.
(6) The fight must begin at the local level, since it is at
the local level that persons feel the loss caused by harmful
invasive weeds and will therefore have the greatest motivation
to take effective action.
(7) To date, effective action has been hampered by inadequate
funding at all levels of government and by inadequate
coordination.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are the following:
(1) To direct the Secretary to coordinate with the National
Invasive Species Council to develop a dedicated program to
combat harmful, invasive terrestrial weeds.
(2) To provide assistance to eligible weed management
entities in carrying out projects to control or eradicate
harmful, invasive weeds on public and private land.
(3) To coordinate projects with existing weed management
entities, areas, districts, and ongoing partnerships.
(4) In locations in which no weed management entity, area, or
district exists, to stimulate the formation of additional local
or regional cooperative weed management entities, such as
entities for weed management areas or districts, that organize
locally affected stakeholders to control or eradicate weeds.
(5) To leverage additional funds from a variety of public and
private sources to control or eradicate weeds through local
stakeholders.
(6) To promote healthy, diverse, and desirable plant
communities by abating through a variety of measures the threat
posed by harmful, invasive weeds.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Council.--The term ``Council'' means the National
Invasive Species Council established by Executive Order 13112
of February 3, 1999.
(2) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the meaning
given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination
and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
(3) Local stakeholder.--
(A) In general.--The term ``local stakeholder'' means
an interested party that participates in the
establishment of a weed management entity in a State.
(B) Inclusions.--The term ``local stakeholder''
includes a Federal, State, local, tribal, or private
landowner.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of
the Interior.
(5) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several
States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any other
territory or possession of the United States.
(6) Weed.--The term ``weed'' means any parasitic or other
kind of plant at any living stage (including seeds and
reproductive parts of such a plant), that--
(A) is of foreign origin;
(B) is new or not widely prevalent in a region,
State, or the United States; and
(C) can directly or indirectly impact other useful
plants, livestock, wildlife resources, or the public
health.
(7) Weed management entity.--The term ``weed management
entity'' means an entity that--
(A) is recognized by the State in which it is
established;
(B) is established by and includes local
stakeholders;
(C) is established for the purpose of controlling or
eradicating harmful, invasive weeds on public or
private land and increasing public knowledge and
education concerning the need to control or eradicate
harmful, invasive weeds on public or private land; and
(D) is multijurisdictional and multidisciplinary in
nature.
SEC. 4. ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.
The Secretary, in coordination with the Council, shall establish in
the Office of the Secretary a program to provide financial assistance
through States to eligible weed management entities to control or
eradicate harmful, invasive weeds on public and private land.
SEC. 5. ALLOCATION OF FUNDS TO STATES AND INDIAN TRIBES.
(a) Allocation.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), in consultation
with the Council, the Secretary shall allocate funds made
available for each fiscal year under section 12 to States and
Indian tribes to provide funding in accordance with sections 6
and 7 to weed management entities to carry out projects
approved by States and Indian tribes to control or eradicate
harmful, invasive weeds on public and private land.
(2) Federal allocation to indian tribes.--Of the funds made
available for allocation under section 12 for each fiscal year,
5 percent shall be--
(A) reserved for allocation to Indian tribes; and
(B) administered by the Council.
(b) Amount.--The Secretary shall determine the amount of Federal
funds allocated to a State or Indian tribe for a fiscal year under this
section to be used to address a harmful, invasive terrestrial weed
problem in the State or portion of the State, or on land or in water
under the jurisdiction of the Indian tribe, on the basis of--
(1) the severity or potential severity of the harmful,
invasive weed problem;
(2) the extent to which the Federal funds will be used to
leverage non-Federal funds to address the harmful, invasive
weed problem;
(3) the extent to which the State or Indian tribe has made
progress in addressing harmful, invasive weed problems; and
(4) other factors recommended by the Council and approved by
the Secretary.
SEC. 6. USE OF FUNDS ALLOCATED TO STATES.
(a) In General.--A State that receives an allocation of funds under
section 5 for a fiscal year shall use--
(1) not more than 25 percent of the allocation to make an
incentive payment to each weed management entity established in
the State, in accordance with subsection (b); and
(2) not less than 75 percent of the allocation to make
financial awards to weed management entities established in the
State, in accordance with subsection (c).
(b) Incentive Payments.--
(1) Use by weed management entities.--
(A) In general.--Incentive payments under subsection
(a)(1) shall be used by weed management entities--
(i) to encourage the formation of new weed
management entities; or
(ii) to carry out 1 or more projects
described in subsection (d) to improve the
effectiveness of existing weed management
entities or programs.
(B) Duration of payments.--A weed management entity
is eligible to receive an incentive payment under
subparagraph (A) for not more than 3 years in the
aggregate.
(C) Federal share.--
(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause
(ii), for purposes of subparagraph (A), the
Federal share of the cost of carrying out a
project described in subsection (d) shall not
exceed 50 percent.
(ii) Adjustment.--After consultation with the
Secretary, the Governor of a State that makes
either an incentive payment or financial award
under subsection (a) may increase, to a maximum
of 100 percent, such Federal share of a project
that the Governor determines is necessary to
meet the needs of an underserved area.
(iii) Form of matching funds.--Under
subparagraph (A), the non-Federal share of the
cost of carrying out a project described in
subsection (d) may be provided--
(I) in cash or in kind; or
(II) in the form of Federal funds
made available under a Federal law
other than this Act.
(2) Eligibility of weed management entities.--To be eligible
to obtain an incentive payment under paragraph (1) for a fiscal
year, a weed management entity in a State shall--
(A)(i) for the first fiscal year for which the entity
receives an incentive payment under this subsection,
provide to the State in which it is established a
description of--
(I) the purposes for which the entity was
established; and
(II) any projects to be carried out to
accomplish those purposes; and
(ii) for any subsequent fiscal year for which the
entity receives an incentive payment, provide to the
State--
(I) a description of the activities carried
out by the entity in the previous fiscal year--
(aa) to control or eradicate harmful,
invasive weeds on public or private
land; or
(bb) to increase public knowledge and
education concerning the need to
control or eradicate harmful, invasive
weeds on public or private land; and
(II) the results of each such activity; and
(B) meet such additional eligibility requirements,
and conform to such process for determining
eligibility, as the State may establish.
(c) Financial Awards.--
(1) Use by weed management entities.--
(A) In general.--Financial awards under subsection
(a)(2) shall be used by weed management entities to pay
the Federal share of the cost of carrying out projects
described in subsection (d) that are selected by the
State in accordance with subsection (d).
(B) Federal share.--
(i) In general.--Except as provided in clause
(ii), for purposes of subparagraph (A), the
Federal share of the cost of carrying out a
project described in subsection (d) shall not
exceed 50 percent.
(ii) Adjustment.--After consultation with the
Secretary, the Governor of a State that makes
either an incentive payment or financial award
under subsection (a) may increase, to a maximum
of 100 percent, such Federal share of a project
that the Governor determines is necessary to
meet the needs of an underserved area.
(iii) Form of matching funds.--Under
subparagraph (A), the non-Federal share of the
cost of carrying out a project described in
subsection (d) may be provided--
(I) in cash or in kind; or
(II) in the form of Federal funds
made available under a Federal law
other than this Act.
(2) Eligibility of weed management entities.--To be eligible
to obtain a financial award under paragraph (1) for a fiscal
year, a weed management entity in a State shall--
(A) meet the requirements for eligibility for an
incentive payment under subsection (b)(2); and
(B) submit to the State a description of the project
for which the financial award is sought.
(d) Projects.--
(1) In general.--A weed management entity may use a financial
award received under this section to carry out a project to
control or eradicate harmful, invasive weeds on public or
private land, including--
(A) education, inventories and mapping, management,
monitoring, and similar activities, including the
payment of the cost of personnel and equipment that
promote such control or eradication; and
(B) other activities to promote such control or
eradication, if the results of the activities are
disseminated to the public.
(2) Selection of projects.--A State shall select projects for
funding under this section on a competitive basis, taking into
consideration--
(A) the seriousness of the harmful, invasive weed
problem or potential problem addressed by the project;
(B) the likelihood that the project will prevent or
resolve the problem, or increase knowledge about
resolving similar problems in the future;
(C) the extent to which the payment will leverage
non-Federal funds to address the harmful, invasive weed
problem addressed by the project;
(D) the extent to which the recipient weed management
entity has made progress in addressing harmful,
invasive weed problems;
(E) the extent to which the project will provide a
comprehensive approach to the control or eradication of
harmful, invasive weeds;
(F) the extent to which the project will reduce the
total population of a harmful, invasive weed within the
State;
(G) the extent to which the project uses the
principles of integrated vegetation management and
sound science; and
(H) other factors that the State determines to be
relevant.
(3) Scope of projects.--
(A) In general.--A weed management entity shall
determine the geographic scope of the harmful, invasive
weed problem to be addressed through a project using an
incentive payment or financial award received under
this section.
(B) Multiple states.--A weed management entity may
use an incentive payment or financial award under this
section to carry out a project to address the harmful,
invasive weed problem of more than 1 State only if the
entity meets the requirements of all applicable State
laws.
(4) Land.--A weed management entity may use an incentive
payment or financial award received under this section to carry
out a project to control or eradicate weeds on any public land,
or on any private land with the approval of the owner or
operator of the land.
(5) Prohibition on use of funds.--An incentive payment or
financial award under this Act may not be used to carry out a
project--
(A) to control or eradicate animal pests or submerged
or floating harmful, invasive aquatic weeds; or
(B) to protect an agricultural commodity (as defined
in section 102 of the Agricultural Trade Act of 1978 (7
U.S.C. 5602)) other than--
(i) livestock (as defined in section 602 of
the Agricultural Trade Act of 1949 (7 U.S.C.
1471); or
(ii) an animal- or insect-based product.
(e) Administrative Costs.--Not more than 5 percent of the funds made
available under section 12 for a fiscal year may be used by the Federal
Government to pay the administrative costs of the program established
by this Act, including the costs of complying with Federal
environmental laws.
(f) Report.--As a condition of the receipt of an incentive payment or
financial award under this Act, a weed management entity in a State
that received such a payment or award shall submit to the Council a
report that describes the purposes and results of each project for
which the payment or award was used, by not later than 6 months after
completion of the projects.
SEC. 7. USE OF FUNDS ALLOCATED TO INDIAN TRIBES.
(a) In General.--The requirements for the use of funds allocated to
States described in section 6 shall apply to the use of funds allocated
to Indian tribes under section 5(a)(2).
(b) Insufficient or Excess Funds.--
(1) Insufficient funds.--If, in any fiscal year, the funds
allocated to Indian tribes under section 5(a)(2) are not
sufficient to provide incentive payments or financial awards to
each weed management entity of an Indian tribe, an Indian tribe
may seek additional funds by participating as a local
stakeholder in the establishment of a weed management entity
that receives assistance under section 6.
(2) Excess funds.--Any excess funds remaining after the
provision of incentive payments or financial awards to weed
management entities of Indian tribes shall be reserved by the
Council for use in carrying out this Act in the following
fiscal year.
(c) Report.--As a condition of the receipt of an incentive payment or
financial award under this Act, not later than October 30 of each year,
a weed management entity of an Indian tribe that received such a
payment or award in the preceding fiscal year shall submit to the
Council a report that describes, for that preceding fiscal year, the
purposes for which the payment or award was used.
SEC. 8. FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS.
The Secretary of Agriculture and the Council shall make
recommendations to the Secretary regarding--
(1) the annual allocation of funds to States and Indian
tribes under section 5; and
(2) other issues related to funding under this Act.
SEC. 9. LAND-RELATED CONDITIONS.
(a) Consent of Landowner.--Any activity involving real property may
be carried out under this Act only with the consent of the landowner.
(b) No Effect on PILT Payments.--The provision of funds to any entity
under this Act shall have no effect on the amount of any payment
received by a county from the Federal Government under chapter 69 of
title 31, United States Code (commonly known as ``payments in lieu of
taxes'').
SEC. 10. APPLICABILITY OF OTHER LAWS.
Any activity carried out under this Act shall comply with all other
Federal laws (including regulations), including the Endangered Species
Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
SEC. 11. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PROGRAMS.
Assistance authorized under this Act is intended to supplement, and
not replace, assistance available to weed management entities, areas,
and districts for control or eradication of harmful, invasive weeds on
public lands and private lands, including funding available under the
Pulling Together Initiative of the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation.
SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
To carry out this Act there is authorized to be appropriated to the
Secretary $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of H.R. 1462 is to require the Secretary of the
Interior to establish a program to provide assistance through
States to eligible weed management entities to control or
eradicate harmful, nonnative weeds on public and private land.
Background and Need for Legislation
Invasive nonnative species are considered one of the
greatest threats to our public and private lands. Nonnative
species are also referred to as ``non-indigenous,'' ``exotic,''
or ``alien.'' Introduction of exotic plant species on the
American continent started almost immediately with the first
European colonization. Many of these nonnative introductions
were purposeful, and have proven to be beneficial, such as most
row crops, domesticated animals, some game species, and
ornamental plants.
Others, however, have turned out to be extremely harmful,
especially several plant species, such as Buffalobur, Bighead
Knapweed, Velvetleaf, Leafy Spurge, Scotch Thistle, Yellow Star
Thistle, Kudzu, and Purple Loosestrife. Many of these plants
were controlled in their native lands by natural forces such as
insects, animals, or viruses. However, in America, without such
natural factors controlling their growth, these noxious plants
have and continue to expand their range unchecked. The largest
ecological threat posed by invasive plant species is the
disruption of entire ecosystems where invasive species replace
native plants. Plant invaders completely alter the fire regime,
nutrient cycle, and hydrology in a native ecosystem, and
greatly diminish the abundance or survival of native species.
For example, Cheat Grass in the western United States has
increased the frequency and intensity of fires so that native
species cannot recover. Another example would be the effects of
Leafy Spurge on rangelands. An invasive plant from Eurasia, it
crowds out desirable and nutritious forage, reduces land
values, and degrades wildlife habitat. Annual damages from this
weed are estimated to exceed $100 million in the Great Plains
States. In short, these harmful, invasive weeds out perform the
natural vegetation indigenous to an area and leave in their
wake a vast monoculture of weeds. It is thought that up to 46%
of the plants and animals on the federal endangered species
list have been negatively impacted by invasive species.
Today, the United States faces unprecedented harm from
invasive weeds--unprecedented because the spread of weeds in
many cases is exponential. In one year, certain species of
invasive weeds can go from three or four plants one year to 100
or so the next year, a couple thousand the next year, and so
on. It has been estimated that in the United States--on public
land alone--about 5,000 acres of native habitat is being lost
per day to noxious weeds. For example, today approximately 2.6
million acres of national parklands are infested by invasive
plants. Consequently, it is much easier to eradicate three or
four plants today than eradicate millions of plants five years
in the future.
According to the General Accounting Office, in Fiscal Year
2001, the U.S. Department of Agriculture spent about $925
million on a wide range of invasive species-related
activities--almost 90 percent of the total federal funding
directed toward these activities. The Departments of Interior
and Defense accounted for another $37 million and $10 million,
respectively. Combined, this amount is less than one half of
one percent of the estimated total annual economic losses of
$137 billion caused by all invasive exotic species.
H.R. 1462 attempts to address a fundamental obstacle to
effective weed management: a lack of adequate and available
funding at the local level and inadequate coordination and
reliance on the federal government. H.R. 1462 will provide weed
management funds to States for a variety of land managers who
are working together on cooperative weed management projects.
Under the bill, matching grants would be available to: (1)
assist eligible weed management entities in carrying out
projects to control or eradicate harmful, invasive weeds on
public or private land; (2) coordinate the projects with
existing weed management areas and districts; (3) stimulate the
formation of additional local or regional cooperative weed
management entities in locations in which none exist; (4)
leverage additional funds from public and private sources to
control or eradicate weeds through local stakeholders; and (5)
promote healthy, diverse and desirable plant communities by
abating the threat posed by harmful, nonnative weeds.
Eligible weed management entities are defined as entities
recognized by a State and are established by local stakeholders
to control or eradicate harmful nonnative weeds on public or
private land. These entities are also charged with increasing
public knowledge and education concerning the need to control
or eradicate harmful nonnative weeds on public or private land.
Funds allocated to States may be used for either incentive
payments--to encourage the formation of new management entities
or improve the effectiveness of weed management entities, or
financial payments--funds to be used by weed management
entities to pay the federal share of the cost of carrying out
projects to control or eradicate of harmful, nonnative weeds on
public or private land. Projects could include education,
inventories and mapping, management, monitoring, and similar
activities.
States shall select projects for funding on a competitive
basis, taking into consideration, among other factors, the
seriousness of the weed problem, the likelihood that the
project will prevent or resolve the problem, the extent to
which the payment will leverage non-federal funds to address
the weed problem, and the extent the project will provide a
comprehensive approach to the control or eradication of the
weeds. Projects on private land will require approval of the
owner of the land. Funds are also restricted from any project
to control or eradicate submerged or floating aquatic noxious
weeds or animal pests.
States may use no more than 25 percent of their allocation
under H.R. 1462 to make an incentive payment to a weed
management entity for weed eradication programs, and not less
than 75 percent of the allocation to make financial awards to
weed management entities.
The bill also requires the Secretary of the Interior to
consult with the National Invasive Species Council regarding
the annual allocation of funds to States and Indian tribes and
other issues related to funding under the bill. Of the funds
appropriated in any given year, five percent will be reserved
for Indian tribes.
After receiving funds, each weed management entity is
required to provide to the Councila description of its
activities to control or eradicate harmful, nonnative weeds and the
results of each activity, and how the entity has increased the public
knowledge and education concerning the need to control or eradicate
harmful, nonnative weeds on public or private land.
Committee Action
H.R. 1462 was introduced on April 4, 2001, by Congressman
Joel Hefley (R-CO). The bill was referred to the Committee on
Resources and additionally to the Committee on Agriculture.
Within the Committee on Resources, the bill was referred to the
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands,
and the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and
Oceans. On June 19, 2001, the Subcommittee on National Parks,
Recreation and Public Lands held a hearing on the bill. On
March 7, 2002, the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation,
and Public Lands met to mark up the bill. Congressman Hefley
offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute that made
the following changes to the original text: (1) eliminated the
advisory council and directed the Secretary of the Interior to
consult with the National Invasive Species Council in
developing the weed program and in evaluating State grant
requests; (2) redefined the term ``weed''; (3) required the
Governor of a State to consult with the Secretary prior to
allocating 100 percent of the federal share for a project; (4)
clarified that a weed management entity involved with more than
one State may use the funds authorized by the bill as long as
it meets the requirements of each State; and (5) clarified that
funds authorized by the bill are not intended to replace
assistance under existing programs. It was adopted by voice
vote. The bill, as amended, was then ordered favorably reported
to the Full Committee by voice vote. On April 24, 2002, the
Full Resources Committee met to consider the bill. The
Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans was
discharged from further consideration of the bill. No further
amendments were offered and the bill as amended was then
ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by
voice vote.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short title
Section 1 contains the short title of the bill, the
``Harmful Invasive Weed Control Act of 2002.''
Section 2. Findings and purpose
Section 2 contains findings and purposes of the bill, which
is to provide assistance to eligible weed management entities
in carrying out projects to control or eradicate harmful,
invasive weeds on public and private land.
Section 3. Definitions
Section 3 includes definitions for terms associated with
the bill.
Section 4. Establishment of program
Section 4 establishes the program within the office of the
Secretary of the Interior in coordination with the National
Invasive Species Council, which will provide financial
assistance through States to eligible weed management entities.
Section 5. Allocation of funds to States and Indian Tribes
Section 5 provides for the allocation of funds for the
incentive payment and the financial award to States and Indian
Tribes for weed management entities for purposes of controlling
or eradicating invasive weeds.
Section 6. Use of funds allocated to States
Section 6 outlines the permitted uses for the allocations
for the incentive payment and financial award, eligibility
requirements for weed management entities, selection criteria
for awards grants, and reporting requirements.
Section 7. Use of funds allocated to Indian Tribes
Section 7 contains requirements for the use of allocated
funds to Indian Tribes.
Section 8. Funding recommendations
Section 8 describes funding recommendations for the
Secretary of Agriculture and the National Invasive Species
Council.
Section 9. Land-related conditions
Section 9 contains land-related conditions.
Section 10. Applicability of other laws
Section 10 describes the applicability of other laws to the
bill.
Section 11. Relationship to other programs
Section 11 describes the relationship of the Act to
existing programs.
Section 12. Authorization of appropriations
Section 12 contains the authorization of appropriations--
$100 million for each of Fiscal Years 2002 through 2006.
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Resources' oversight findings and recommendations
are reflected in the body of this report.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United
States grants Congress the authority to enact this bill.
Compliance With House Rule XIII
1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the
Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and
a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be
incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B)
of that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when
the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted
cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2)
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this
bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in
revenues or tax expenditures.
3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or
objective of this bill is to require the Secretary of the
Interior to establish a program to provide assistance through
States to eligible weed management entities to control or
eradicate harmful, nonnative weeds on public or private land.
4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause
3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate
for this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, May 7, 2002.
Hon. James V. Hansen,
Chairman, Committee on Resources, House of Representatives, Washington,
DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1462, the Harmful
Invasive Weed Control Act of 2002.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Megan
Carroll.
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 1462--Harmful Invasive Weed Control Act of 2002
Summary: H.R. 1462 would direct the Secretary of the
Interior to establish a program to provide grants to states and
Indian tribes to support projects to control or eradicate
harmful, invasive weeds on public and private lands. CBO
estimates that the proposed program would cost $10 million in
2003 and $245 million over the 2003-2007 period, assuming
appropriation of the authorized amounts. The bill would not
affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go
procedures would not apply.
H.R. 1462 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments. The assistance authorized by this bill would
benefit state, local, and tribal governments. Any costs
incurred by these governments to comply with the conditions of
this assistance would be voluntary.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 1462 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 300
(natural resources and environment).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Authorization level........................... 100 100 100 100 100 0
Estimated outlays............................. 0 10 30 45 75 85
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate: H.R. 1462 would authorize the
appropriation of $100 million a year over the 2002-2006 period
for the Secretary of the Interior to make grants to states and
Indian tribes to fund projects to control or eradicate harmful,
invasive weeds on public and private lands. Based on
information from the Department of the Interior, CBO estimates
that implementing this bill would cost $10 million in 2003 and
$245 million over the 2003-2007 period, with additional
spending occurring in later years. For this estimate, we assume
H.R. 1462 will be enacted by July 1, 2002, and that authorized
amounts would be provided as specified by the bill. Estimates
of outlays are based on spending patterns for similar
activities.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and private-section impact: H.R. 1462
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments. The assistance authorized by this bill
would benefit state, local, and tribal governments. Any costs
incurred by these governments to comply with the conditions of
this assistance would be voluntary.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Megan Carroll; Impact
on State, local, or tribal governments: Marjorie Miller; Impact
on the private sector: Lauren Marks.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Compliance With Public Law 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
Preemption of State, Local or Tribal Law
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or
tribal law.
Changes in Existing Law
If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing
law.