[House Report 107-564]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



107th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     107-564

======================================================================



 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 
                                  2003

                                _______
                                

 July 11, 2002.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Skeen, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 5093]

    The Committee on Appropriations submits the following 
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making 
appropriations for the Department of the Interior and Related 
Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003. The 
bill provides regular annual appropriations for the Department 
of the Interior (except the Bureau of Reclamation) and for 
other related agencies, including the Forest Service, the 
Department of Energy, the Indian Health Service, the 
Smithsonian Institution, and the National Foundation on the 
Arts and the Humanities.

                                CONTENTS

_______________________________________________________________________


                                                            Page number

                                                            Bill Report
Department of the Interior:
        Bureau of Land Management..........................     2
                                                                     10
        U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.....................    12
                                                                     25
        National Park Service..............................    23
                                                                     40
        U.S. Geological Survey.............................    32
                                                                     59
        Minerals Management Service........................    34
                                                                     66
        Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 
            Enforcement....................................    37
                                                                     68
        Bureau of Indian Affairs...........................    39
                                                                     73
        Departmental Offices...............................    47
                                                                     81
        General Provisions.................................    54
                                                                     92
Related Agencies:
        Forest Service, USDA...............................    75
                                                                     94
        Department of Energy...............................    92
                                                                    119
        Fossil Energy......................................    92
                                                                    119
        Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves.............    94
                                                                    125
        Energy Conservation................................    95
                                                                    128
        Economic Regulation................................    95
                                                                    134
        Strategic Petroleum Reserve........................    96
                                                                    135
        Energy Information Administration..................    96
                                                                    136
Indian Health Service, DHHS................................    99
                                                                    137
Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation................   107
                                                                    143
Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and 
    Arts Development.......................................   108
                                                                    144
Smithsonian Institution....................................   108
                                                                    144
National Gallery of Art....................................   111
                                                                    148
John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.............   113
                                                                    151
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars...........   113
                                                                    152
National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities.........   114
                                                                    152
Commission of Fine Arts....................................   116
                                                                    157
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation..................   117
                                                                    158
National Capital Planning Commission.......................   117
                                                                    158
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum....................   117
                                                                    159
Presidio Trust.............................................   118
                                                                    159
Title III-- General Provisions.............................   118
                                                                    160

                   Comparison With Budget Resolution

    Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, requires that the report accompanying a bill providing 
new budget authority contain a Statement detailing how the 
authority compares with the reports submitted under section 302 
of the Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent 
resolution on the budget for the fiscal year. This information 
follows:

                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Sec. 302(b)                     This bill--
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Discretionary     Mandatory     Discretionary     Mandatory
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget authority................................         $19,730              63         $19,730              63
Outlays.........................................          18,969              64          19,260              64
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The allocation for fiscal year 2003 includes $1,440,000,000 
in discretionary budget authority for conservation spending 
pursuant to Section 251(c) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency 
Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended, and $1,052,000,000 in 
outlays. There is also $400,000,000 in outlays attributable to 
additional 2002 emergency firefighting funds included in the 
outlay total.

                          Summary of the Bill

    The Committee has conducted hearings on the programs and 
projects provided for in the Interior and Related Agencies 
Appropriations bill for 2003. The hearings are contained in 9 
published volumes totaling nearly 10,000 pages.
    During the course of the hearings, testimony was taken at 
14 hearings on 11 days, not only from agencies which come under 
the jurisdiction of the Interior Subcommittee, but also from 
Members of Congress, and, in written form, from State and local 
government officials, and private citizens.
    The bill that is recommended for fiscal year 2003 has been 
developed after careful consideration of all the facts and 
details available to the Committee.

                                  BUDGET AUTHORITY RECOMMENDED IN BILL BY TITLE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 Committee bill
                        Activity                         Budget estimates,   Committee bill,     compared with
                                                          fiscal year 2003   fiscal year 2003   budget estimates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I, Department of the Interior: New Budget             $9,450,753,000     $9,969,175,000      +$518,422,000
 (obligational) authority..............................
Title II, related agencies: New Budget (obligational)        9,488,163,000     10,444,950,000       +956,787,000
 authority.............................................
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Grand total, New Budget (obligational) authority.     18,938,916,000     20,414,125,000     +1,475,209,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Total Appropriations for the Department of the Interior and Related 
                                Agencies

    In addition to the amounts in the accompanying bill, which 
are reflected in the table above, permanent legislation 
authorizes the continuation of certain government activities 
without consideration by the Congress during the annual 
appropriations process.
    Details of these activities are listed in tables at the end 
of this report. In fiscal year 2001, these activities are 
estimated to total $3,384,125,000. The estimate for fiscal year 
2002 is $3,584,842,000.
    The following table reflects the total budget 
(obligational) authority contained both in this bill and in 
permanent appropriations for fiscal years 2002 and 2003.

        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES TOTAL BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEARS 2002-2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Item                            Fiscal year 2002   Fiscal year 2003        Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interior and related agencies appropriations bill......    $19,167,770,000    $20,414,125,000    +$1,246,355,000
Permanent appropriations, Federal funds................      2,588,751,000      2,548,278,000        -40,473,000
Permanent appropriations, trust funds..................        624,897,000        595,918,000        -28,979,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total budget authority...........................     22,381,418,000     23,558,321,000     +1,176,903,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Revenue Generated by Agencies in Bill

    The following tabulation indicates total new obligational 
authority to date for fiscal years 2001 and 2002, and the 
amount recommended in the bill for fiscal year 2003. It 
compares receipts generated by activities in this bill on an 
actual basis for fiscal year 2001 and on an estimated basis for 
fiscal years 2002 and 2003. The programs in this bill are 
estimated to generate $6.1 billion in revenues for the Federal 
Government in fiscal year 2003. Therefore, the expenditures in 
this bill will contribute to economic stability rather than 
inflation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Fiscal year--
                          Item                          --------------------------------------------------------
                                                                2001               2002               2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New obligational authority.............................    $18,892,320,000    $19,167,770,000    $20,414,125,000
Receipts:
    Department of the Interior.........................     10,865,661,000      6,609,623,000      5,719,689,000
    Forest Service.....................................        424,019,000        420,972,000        422,036,000
    Naval Petroleum Reserves...........................          7,836,000          7,187,000          7,233,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total receipts...................................     11,297,516,000      7,037,782,000      6,148,958,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   Application of General Reductions

    The level at which sequestration reductions shall be taken 
pursuant to the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
Act of 1985, if such reductions are required in fiscal year 
2003, is defined by the Committee as follows:
    As provided for by section 256(l)(2) of Public Law 99-177, 
as amended, and for the purpose of a Presidential Order issued 
pursuant to section 254 of said Act, the term ``program, 
project, and activity'' for items under the jurisdiction of the 
Appropriations Subcommittees on the Department of the Interior 
and Related Agencies of the House of Representatives and the 
Senate is defined as (1) any item specifically identified in 
tables or written material set forth in the Interior and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, or accompanying committee 
reports or the conference report and accompanying joint 
explanatory Statement of the managers of the committee of 
conference; (2) any Government-owned or Government-operated 
facility; and (3) management units, such as National parks, 
National forests, fish hatcheries, wildlife refuges, research 
units, regional, State and other administrative units and the 
like, for which funds are provided in fiscal year 2003.
    The Committee emphasizes that any item for which a specific 
dollar amount is mentioned in any accompanying report, 
including all increases over the budget estimate approved by 
the Committee, shall be subject to a percentage reduction no 
greater or less than the percentage reduction applied to all 
domestic discretionary accounts.

                   Federal Funding of Indian Programs

    The Committee recommends appropriations of new budget 
authority aggregating $5.2 billion for Indian programs in 
fiscal year 2003. This is an increase of $99 million above the 
budget request and an increase of $230 million above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 2002. Spending for Indian services 
by the Federal Government in total is included in the following 
table.

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Fiscal year
                        Budget Authority                            Fiscal year     Fiscal year    2003, budget
                                                                    2001 actual    2002, enacted     estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Agriculture.......................................        $611,737        $671,438        $711,397
Department of Commerce..........................................          41,884          17,534          12,534
Department of Defense...........................................          18,000          18,000               0
Department of Justice...........................................         202,960         237,122         201,264
Department of Education.........................................       1,852,991       1,974,208       2,064,089
Department of HHS...............................................       3,125,858       3,341,815       3,421,043
Department of HUD...............................................         731,557         731,557         729,500
Department of Veterans Affairs..................................             538             551             565
Department of the Interior......................................       2,617,113       2,664,262       2,770,316
Department of Labor.............................................          71,919          73,919          70,014
Department of Transportation....................................         265,481         281,411         202,029
Environmental Protection Agency.................................         216,109         228,698         232,276
Small Business Administration...................................           1,250               0           1,000
Smithsonian Institution.........................................          37,305          67,896          53,517
Army Corps of Engineers.........................................          23,777          26,007          23,631
Department of the Treasury......................................           5,000           5,000           5,000
Other Independent Agencies......................................          76,785          80,059          78,846
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................       9,900,264      10,419,477      10,577,021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Constitutional Authority

    Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the House of Representatives 
states that:
    Each report of a committee on a bill or joint resolution of 
a public character, shall include a statement citing the 
specific powers granted to the Congress in the Constitution to 
enact the law proposed by the bill or joint resolution.
    The Committee on Appropriations bases its authority to 
report this legislation from Clause 7 of Section 9 of Article I 
of the Constitution of the United States of America which 
states: ``No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in 
consequence of Appropriations made by law. * * *''
    Appropriations contained in this Act are made pursuant to 
this specific power granted by the Constitution.

Accrual Funding of Retirement Costs and Post-Retirement Health Benefits

    The President's Budget included a legislative proposal 
under the jurisdiction of the House Committee on Government 
Reform to charge to individual agencies, starting in fiscal 
year 2003, the fully accrued costs related to retirement 
benefits of Civil Service Retirement System employees and 
retiree health benefits for all civilian employees. The Budget 
also requested an additional dollar amount in each affected 
discretionary account to cover these accrued costs.
    Without passing judgment on the merits of this legislative 
proposal, the Committee has reduced the dollar amounts of the 
President's request shown in the ``Comparative Statement of New 
Budget Authority'' and other tables in this report to exclude 
the accrual funding proposal. The disposition by Congress of 
the legislative proposal is unclear at this time. Should the 
proposal be passed by Congress and enacted, the Committee will 
make appropriate adjustments to the President's request to 
include accrual amounts.
    The Committee further notes that administration proposals 
requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of 
Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate 
schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. 
Should such a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment formally 
modifying the President's appropriation request for 
discretionary funding is then transmitted to the Congress.
    The Committee is concerned that this practice, which has 
always worked effectively for both Congress and past 
administrations, was not followed for the accrual funding 
proposal. In this case, the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) decided to include accrual amounts in the original 
discretionary appropriations language request. These amounts 
are based on legislation that has yet to be considered and 
approved by the appropriate committees of Congress. This led to 
numerous misunderstandings both inside and outside of Congress 
of what was the ``true'' President's budget request. The 
Committee believes that, in the future, OMB should follow long-
established procedures with respect to discretionary spending 
proposals that require legislative action.

              Allocating Congressional Funding Priorities

    The Committee continues to be concerned that the agencies 
funded by this Act are not following a standard methodology for 
allocating appropriated funds to the field where Congressional 
funding priorities are concerned. When Congressional 
instructions are provided, the Committee expects these 
instructions to be closely monitored and followed. The 
Committee directs that earmarks for Congressional funding 
priorities be first allocated to the receiving units, and then 
all remaining funds should be allocated to the field based on 
established procedures. Field units or programs should not have 
their allocations reduced because of earmarks for Congressional 
priorities without direction from or advance approval of the 
Committee.

                        Conservation Initiative

    The Committee has continued the conservation initiative 
started in title VIII of the fiscal year 2001 Interior and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The table below includes 
funding information for that initiative. Continuing its 
commitment to this important initiative, the Committee has 
recommended a total of $1,440,000,000 for fiscal year 2003. 
This amount is equal to the maximum amount available for 
appropriation through the Interior and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2003. The funding under the 
conservation initiative is summarized in the table below.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  2003 committee
              Subcategory/appropriation account                  2002 Enacted     2003 Request    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Land Acquisition:
    BLM Federal Land Acquisition.............................           49,920       \3\ 44,686           49,286
    FWS Federal Land Acquisition.............................           99,135       \3\ 70,384           82,250
    NPS Federal Land Acquisition.............................          130,117       \3\ 86,057           99,099
    Dept. Mgmt, BIA water settlement.........................  ...............        \3\ 3,000                0
    FS Federal Land Acquisition..............................          149,742      \3\ 130,510          146,336
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Federal Land Acquisition.....................          428,914      \3\ 334,637          376,971
    NPS Stateside LWCF Grants (and Administration)...........          144,000    \3/4\ 200,000          154,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Federal and State LWCF.......................          572,914      \3\ 534,637          530,971
                                                              ==================================================
State and Other Conservation Programs:
    State Wildlife Grants....................................       \1\ 60,000     \2/3\ 60,000      \5\ 100,000
    FWS Incentive Grant Programs.............................           40,000       \3\ 50,000       \5\ 40,000
    FWS Stewardship Grants Program...........................           10,000       \3\ 10,000       \5\ 10,000
    FWS Coop. Endangered Species Conserv. Fund...............           96,235       \3\ 91,000      \5\ 121,400
    FWS North American Wetlands Conserv. Fund................           43,500       \3\ 43,560           43,560
    FWS Migratory Bird Fund..................................          (3,000)          (1,000)            5,000
    FWS Multinational Species Fund...........................          (4,000)          (4,000)            4,800
    USGS State Planning Partnerships.........................           25,000           13,578           25,000
    Cooperative Conservation Initiative (BLM, FWS, NPS)......  ...............           50,000           26,000
    FS, Forest Legacy........................................           65,000       \3\ 69,797       \5\ 60,000
    FS, Forest Stewardship...................................         (33,171)       \3\ 49,526           36,898
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, State & other conservation programs..........          339,735          437,461          472,658
                                                              ==================================================
Urban and Historic Preservation Programs:
    NPS Historic Preservation Fund...........................           74,500           67,000           76,500
    NPS Urban Parks & Recreation Recovery Grants.............           30,000              300           30,000
    FS Urban and Community Forestry..........................           36,000           36,235           36,235
    Youth Conservation Corps (BLM, FWS, NPS, FS).............            7,000            7,000            7,000
      Subtotal, Urban & Historic.............................          147,500          110,535          149,735
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
Payments in Lieu of Taxes--BLM...............................           50,000           15,000       \7\ 70,000
National Wildlife Refuge Fund sharing--FWS...................  ...............  ...............        \8\ 5,000
                                                              ==================================================
Federal Infrastructure Improvement Programs..................          184,851          220,102          211,636
                                                              ==================================================
      Total, Conservation Spending Category..................        1,295,000        1,317,735       1,440,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) There was a $25m rescission of these funds in FY 02, amount shown is after rescission; (2) $5,000,000 for
  tribal grants included in State Wildlife grants category; (3) requested from LWCF in 2003; (4) includes $50
  million for Coop. Conservation Initiative; (5) includes funding from Land and Water Conservation Fund; (6)
  includes $30,000,000 for Saving America's Treasures; (7) an additional $160 million for PILT is not in CSC;
  (8) an additional $14,414,000 for refuge fund is not in CSC.

                       Conservation Partnerships

    The Committee has not agreed to start a new cooperative 
conservation initiative, as proposed by the Department of the 
Interior, but wholeheartedly supports the concept of 
cooperative efforts to address critical habitat restoration and 
protection needs. The Committee believes that the goal of 
conservation through partnerships should be accomplished using 
existing cooperative programs. The current challenge cost share 
programs in each of the land management agencies are excellent 
examples of partnership efforts that leverage Federal funds. 
The Committee strongly believes agencies should view 
partnerships as an approach to doing business rather than an 
opportunity to create new programs or new administrative 
entities to accomplish cooperative conservation. The total 
amount added to the budget request to address cooperative 
partnerships through existing programs at the Department of the 
Interior is $41,000,000 as detailed below. In addition, the 
Committee recommends continuing the landowner incentive program 
and the private stewardship grant program, which were started 
in fiscal year 2002 under the Fish and Wildlife Service. The 
$50,000,000 for those two new programs is continued for fiscal 
year 2003.
    The Committee has recommended increases in the challenge 
cost share programs in the Department of the Interior. In the 
Bureau of Land Management, an increase of $10,000,000 is 
recommended, which more than doubles the funding to a total of 
$19,000,000. Under the Committee's recommendation for fiscal 
year 2003, funding for the National Park Service challenge cost 
share program will be increased by $7,000,000, an increase of 
100 percent, for a total availability of $14,000,000. The 
amount not set-aside for Lewis and Clark projects will actually 
increase by 350 percent--from $2,000,000 to $9,000,000. In the 
Fish and Wildlife Service about $3,500,000 in refuge operations 
is currently used for the challenge cost share program and the 
Committee has recommended adding $3,000,000 for that program.
    In the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Committee has 
recommended adding funding to several existing programs that 
have a demonstrated ability to leverage Federal funds. The 
Committee has also placed an emphasis on addressing invasive 
species control through cost-shared projects. In addition to 
the increase for the refuge challenge cost share program, the 
Committee has recommended increases of $2,000,000 for on-refuge 
invasive species control projects using friends groups and 
volunteers, $1,000,000 for invasive species control projects 
under the Partners for Fish and Wildlife program, $1,000,000 
for spartina control in Willapa Bay, Washington with the 
expectation that the State and other partners will provide 
additional funds to address this problem, $1,000,000 for 
coastal programs, $1,000,000 for joint venture programs in 
migratory bird management, $2,000,000 for fish passage 
projects, and $1,000,000 for aquatic nuisance control. The 
Committee has also recommended an increase of $12,000,000 for 
habitat conservation plan land acquisition under the 
cooperative endangered species conservation fund.
    The Committee also notes that the North American Wetlands 
Conservation program in the Fish and Wildlife Service is an 
excellent example of the power of conservation partnerships. 
Likewise, the Committee continues to support funding for the 
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation in the Bureau of Land 
Management, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park 
Service, and the Forest Service. The Committee suggests that 
the Natural Resource Damage Assessment program should be 
examined for enhanced restoration partnership potential.
    The Committee notes that the Forest Service had an active 
challenge cost share program using available funds; as recently 
as fiscal year 2000 the Forest Service set aside $35,057,000 
and anticipated $56,517,000 in cooperator contributions. This 
funding produced tremendous on-the ground accomplishments 
providing substantial conservation, leverage of non-Federal 
funds, and successful cooperation with many local groups. The 
Committee has additional instructions for the Forest Service 
challenge cost share program under the National forest system 
heading. The Committee expects the Forest Service to 
reestablish this program.
    The Committee strongly encourages the Department of the 
Interior and the Forest Service to use proven, existing 
programs, and use the existing criteria for those programs, to 
meet the goals of cooperative conservation. In the fiscal year 
2004 budget, the Committee encourages the Department of the 
Interior and the Forest Service to expand programs with proven 
track records for leveraging Federal funds to deliver on the 
ground habitat restoration and protection. The fiscal year 2004 
budget justification should include a crosscut table of 
partnership programs for each land management agency, including 
information on Federal funding and cost sharing by program. The 
Department of the Interior and the Forest Service should also 
report to the Committee no later than December 31, 2002, on the 
current status of their conservation partnership programs.

       Energy Research--Responding to the National Energy Policy

    Last year the Committee wholeheartedly welcomed the 
Administration's National Energy Policy. The Committee was 
disappointed that the budget request for fiscal year 2003 for 
energy programs did not more fully embrace research in many 
critical areas. The Committee agrees that the Department of 
Energy must do a better job of measuring potential program 
success and of refocusing or discontinuing programs that are 
not yielding results. However, the Committee also believes that 
new programs must continue to be explored and promising 
research need to be expanded if we are to achieve the goals of 
energy independence, dramatically lower energy consumption, and 
significantly reduced emissions of harmful pollutants from 
energy production and use.
    The Committee's recommendations are responsive to those 
goals and to the underlying National Energy Policy. The 
recommendations include $1.9 billion for energy programs in the 
Interior bill, an increase of $126 million above last year and 
$175 million above the budget request. The recommendations 
reflect a balanced approach to handling both the supply and 
demand sides of the energy issue. Likewise, there is a balance 
between research on technologies for traditional and 
alternative fuels. We need both traditional fuels and 
alternative fuels and we need to find ways to use all fuels and 
technologies more efficiently and more cleanly.
    The Committee continues to support the President's clean 
coal power initiative and has recommended large increases in 
funding for the weatherization assistance program and for State 
energy grants. The Committee also has recommended restoring 
most of the reductions proposed in the budget request for 
energy conservation research and for research to improve fossil 
energy technologies. We need to do all these things if we are 
to have a balanced and rational national energy strategy.
    The Committee agrees with the Administration that some 
programs have not been as productive as anticipated. In the 
past the Committee has recommended the elimination of dozens of 
such programs in the energy area and will continue to do so in 
the future. The nature of research is such that failures must 
be acknowledged and not perpetuated in order to make room for 
new ideas and unanticipated breakthroughs in technologies.
    Much of the funding in the Interior bill is intended to 
provide seed money for new ideas. Once those ideas result in 
new technology and are adopted by industry, the Federal role is 
completed. Too often in the past, the government has not 
terminated programs that have not yielded results or has 
continued to participate in programs once they were market 
ready. Those mistakes should not be repeated. Most energy 
innovations come about through the actions of industry and 
small entrepreneurs and without Federal assistance. It is not 
the job of the Federal government to pick ``winners and 
losers'' in the energy area. The marketplace and the consumer 
are the ultimate decision makers. The Federal role is an 
important one but it should not extend beyond basic and applied 
research. The Committee, in its recommendations, has attempted 
to maintain diversity of energy research and not cross the line 
into marketing.

                     Recreation on the Public Lands

    Public participation in recreation programs funded in this 
bill is an important and growing aspect of the land management 
agencies under the jurisdiction of this Committee. These 
agencies are responsible for the National Parks managed by the 
National Park Service, the National Wildlife Refuge System 
managed by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the 
Nation's public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management, 
and our National Forests and Grasslands managed by the Forest 
Service. The Forest Service manages 192 million acres, has over 
220 million visits per year, and attracts 84 thousand 
volunteers. By contrast the National Park Service manages 84 
million acres, has about 286 million visitors, and attracts 120 
thousand volunteers. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages 
95 million acres, has 41 million visitors annually and attracts 
35 thousand volunteers. The Bureau of Land Management has the 
largest land base of the land management agencies with 262 
million acres. BLM has about 52 million visitors annually and 
attracts 17 thousand volunteers. The Committee continues to 
place a high priority on maintaining these recreation programs, 
ensuring that the American public has safe and uplifting 
experiences on the Nation's public lands. The Committee is 
grateful to all the volunteers who are helping to make the 
public lands better places for the visiting public and for 
generations to come.

                  Law Enforcement in Southern Arizona

    The Committee is concerned with the limited amount of 
Department of the Interior and Forest Service law enforcement 
resources in southern Arizona. More illegal immigration is 
occurring in this region than any other area of the country. 
These illegal immigrants and drug smuggling activities damage 
the natural and cultural resources, reduce visitor safety, and 
erode public confidence and enjoyment of these lands. Further, 
warming and cooking fires built and abandoned by illegal 
immigrants have caused wildfires that have destroyed over 
40,000 acres of valuable wildlife habitat and are extremely 
dangerous to the surrounding communities. Increased law 
enforcement resources are needed in southern Arizona, and the 
Committee directs the Secretary of the Interior and the Chief 
of the Forest Service to assign additional federal law 
enforcement officers to southern Arizona.

                  TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


                       Bureau of Land Management

    The Bureau of Land Management is responsible for the 
multiple use management, protection, and development of a full 
range of natural resources, including minerals, timber, 
rangeland, fish and wildlife habitat, and wilderness on about 
262 million acres of the Nation's public lands and for 
management of 700 million additional acres of Federally-owned 
subsurface mineral rights. The Bureau is the second largest 
supplier of public outdoor recreation in the Western United 
States.
    Under the multiple-use and ecosystem management concept the 
Bureau administers the grazing of approximately 4.3 million 
head of livestock on some 161 million acres of public land 
ranges, and manages over 48,000 wild horses and burros, some 
262 million acres of wildlife habitat, and over 117,000 miles 
of fisheries habitat. Grazing receipts are estimated to be 
about $14 million in fiscal year 2003, compared to an estimated 
$14 million in fiscal year 2002 and actual receipts of $14 
million in fiscal year 2001. The Bureau also administers about 
49 million acres of commercial forestlands through the 
``Management of Lands and Resources'' and ``Oregon and 
California grant lands'' appropriations. Timber receipts 
(including salvage) are estimated to be $26.7 million in fiscal 
year 2003 compared to estimated receipts of $18.0 million in 
fiscal year 2002 and actual receipts of $12.5 million in fiscal 
year 2001. The Bureau has an active program of soil and 
watershed management on 175 million acres in the lower 48 
States and 92 million acres in Alaska. Practices such as 
revegetation, protective fencing, and water development are 
designed to conserve, enhance, and develop public land, soil, 
and watershed resources. The Bureau is also responsible for 
fire protection on the public lands and on all Department of 
the Interior managed lands in Alaska, and for the suppression 
of wildfires on the public lands in Alaska and the western 
States.

                   MANAGEMENT OF LANDS AND RESOURCES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $775,632,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       812,990,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       826,932,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +51,300,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +13,942,000


    The Committee recommends $826,932,000 for management of 
lands and resources an increase of $13,942,000 above the budget 
request and $51,300,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
level.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    Land resources.--The Committee recommends $182,207,000 for 
land resources, $4,650,000 above the budget request and 
$2,760,000 above the 2002 level including increases above the 
2002 level $2,060,000 for fixed costs, $2,150,000 for NLCS 
reallocation, $1,000,000 for the Bureau's new science 
initiative, $1,500,000 for range monitoring, and $600,000 for 
NLCS, and decreases of $794,000 for travel reductions, $500,000 
for the Idaho Department of Agriculture weed program, 
$1,000,000 for the National Center of Weed Management at 
Montana State University, $400,000 for the Headwater Reserve, 
and $1,856,000 for challenge cost share reallocation. In 
addition, the San Pedro Partnership is maintained at the 2002 
level of $1,000,000.
    The Committee is concerned that the Bureau's range 
conservationist staff levels have decreased dramatically, 
reducing capability to provide rangeland health monitoring and 
service to grazing permit holders. The Committee recommends 
that the $1,500,000 be used to increase the Bureau's capability 
to place more personnel in the field to address more 
effectively rangeland health issues and increase service to 
grazing permittees.
    Last year the Committee required the Secretary of 
Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to charter an 
interagency group to address rangeland assessment and 
monitoring issues at both the local and national levels. Also, 
they are to develop a coordinated plan and budget to carry out 
standardized soil surveys and ecological classification on all 
the Nation's rangelands. The Committee expects the Secretaries 
to provide a detailed progress report by February 1, 2003, on 
how they have responded to that direction, and include in the 
fiscal year 2004 budget justifications projected budget and 
personnel needs to initiate coordinated inventory, assessment 
and monitoring of the Nation's rangelands on a continuing 
basis.
    Wildlife and fisheries.--The Committee recommends 
$34,514,000 for wildlife and fisheries, $760,000 above the 
budget request and $2,913,000 below the 2002 enacted level 
including increases above the 2002 level of $395,000 for fixed 
costs and $260,000 for NLCS reallocation, $500,000 under the 
fisheries subactivity for biological support of use 
authorizations, and decreases of $3,917,000 for challenge cost 
share reallocation, and $152,000 for travel.
    Threatened and endangered species.--The Committee 
recommends $21,760,000 for threatened and endangered species, 
$472,000 above the budget request and $142,000 above the 2002 
enacted level including increases above the 2002 level of 
$257,000 for fixed costs, $385,000 for NLCS reallocation and 
$1,000,000 for planning, and a decrease of $1,500,000 for 
challenge cost share reallocation.
    Recreation management.--The Committee recommends 
$59,383,000 for recreation management, $3,313,000 below the 
budget request and $4,906,000 below the 2002 enacted level 
included increases above the 2002 level of $792,000 for fixed 
costs, $900,000 NLCS, $302,000 under recreation management for 
monitoring, $500,000 recreation access, and decreases of 
$4,115,000 NLCS reallocation, $285,000 for travel, $300,000 for 
Utah mapping, $1,700,000 for challenge cost share reallocation, 
and $1,000,000 for undaunted stewardship.
    Recreation on public lands continues to rapidly increase 
with approximately 220 million visitors to National Forests and 
Grasslands and 65 million visitors to lands managed by the 
Bureau of Land Management. The Committee is concerned that the 
public have adequate access to these lands. Over a decade ago, 
a General Accounting Office (GAO) report found that over 50.4 
million acres of public lands administered by the Forest 
Service and Bureau of Land Management had inadequate access. 
The Committee is unaware of whether access to Federal public 
lands has improved or declined since the 1992 GAO report. 
Therefore, the Committee directs that, by January 31, 2003, the 
Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management submit a report(s) 
that include the number of acres by State under their 
jurisdiction that currently have inadequate public access, by 
State what steps have been taken or are currently underway to 
improve access, what actions are needed to improve access, and 
the extent to which a central repository of information exists 
for those lands with access problems.
    The Committee recommends $802,000 to improve management of 
motorized and non-motorized recreation access to public lands. 
This additional funding is provided to increase the Bureau's 
capability to better meet the growing public demand for 
recreational opportunities on public lands in balance with the 
need to monitor and protect public safety and resource values.
    Energy and minerals.--The Committee recommends $109,069,000 
for energy and minerals including Alaska minerals, $2,000,000 
above the budget request and $9,536,000 above the 2002 enacted 
level including increase above the 2002 level of $1,456,000 for 
fixed costs, $1,000,000 for the National Petroleum Reserve 
Alaska, $3,000,000 for re-permitting the Trans-Alaska pipeline, 
$1,500,000 for inspection and enforcement, $1,000,000 for 
Energy Policy Act assessments, $1,496,000 for applications to 
drill, principally in the Powder River Basin in Wyoming and 
Montana, $900,000 for Indian trust, $700,000 for geothermal 
activities, $500,000 for coal leasing, $450,000 mineral 
materials, and decreases of $341,000 for travel, $350,000 for 
geothermal reallocation, and $1,775,000 for the Alaska mineral 
assessment. Within the funds provided for oil and gas up to 
$500,000 is available to finish the Powder River Basin EISs. No 
funds have been included by the Committee in the fiscal year 
2003 bill for activity related to potential energy development 
within the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
    Realty and ownership management.--The Committee recommends 
$85,350,000 for realty and ownership management, $100,000 above 
the budget request and $653,000 above the 2002 enacted level 
including increases above the 2002 level of $1,169,000 for 
fixed costs, $100,000 for NLCS reallocation, $1,600,000 for 
rights-of-way and $400,000 for renewable energy, and decreases 
of $1,500,000 for the Alaska lands database, $300,000 for the 
Utah survey, $350,000 for the Montana survey, and $466,000 for 
travel.
    Resource protection and maintenance.--The Committee 
recommends $78,777,000 for resource protection and maintenance, 
$2,550,000 above the budget request and $17,086,000 above the 
2002 enacted level including increases above the 2002 of 
$704,000 for fixed costs, $14,000,000 for land management 
plans, $250,000 for the west Mojave plan, $500,000 for NLCS, 
$400,000 for California desert rangers, $500,000 for Imperial 
Sand Dunes law enforcement, and $1,000,000 for mitigation of 
environmental degradation caused by illegal immigrants in 
southeastern Arizona, and a decrease of $268,000 for travel.
    The Committee previously acknowledged the concern that has 
been raised over the condition of the Bureau's land use plans, 
and is providing an additional $14,000,000 as requested for 
this planning effort in 2003.
    The Committee is aware that the BLM is completing the 
regional plan amendments to the California Desert Conservation 
Plan required by a lawsuit settlement involving the Endangered 
Species Act. These plans, to be completed in fiscal year 2003, 
will require increased funding to implement and to avoid 
further litigation risk. Therefore, the Committee strongly 
advises the Department and the Bureau to fund this plan in the 
2004 budget.
    Transportation and facilities maintenance.--The Committee 
recommends $84,278,000 for transportation and facilities 
maintenance, $6,320,000 above the budget request and $6,411,000 
above the 2002 enacted level including increases above the 2002 
level of $502,000 for fixed costs, $1,220,000 for NLCS 
reallocation, $100,000 for the Pacific Crest Trail, $1,000,000 
for California desert communications, and $4,000,000 under 
infrastructure improvement for fish passage improvements 
(culverts) on Bureau lands, and a decrease of $411,000 for 
travel.
    The Committee recognizes the significance of the national 
scenic and historic trails administered by the Bureau, and has 
provided an additional $100,000 for maintenance of sections of 
the Pacific Crest National Scenic Trail in California and 
Oregon.
    Land and resource information systems.--The Committee 
recommends $19,744,000 for land resource information systems, 
$403,000 above the budget request and $12,000 below the 2002 
enacted level including an increase above the 2002 level of 
$121,000 for fixed costs and a decrease of $133,000 for travel.
    Mining law administration.--The Committee recommends 
$32,696,000 for mining law administration. This activity is 
supported by offsetting fees equal to the amount made 
available.
    Workforce and organizational support.--The Committee 
recommends $132,876,000 for workforce and organizational 
support the same as the budget request and $3,570,000 above the 
2002 enacted level including increases above the 2002 level of 
$3,483,000 for fixed costs, and $501,000 for administrative 
support, and a decrease of $414,000 for travel.
    The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 
positive environmental benefits achieved by the military 
through the implementation of pulse technology as a major 
component of its battery management programs. The Committee 
believes that the Bureau would also benefit significantly and 
directly from the use of this technology to extend the life of 
vehicle batteries. These benefits include savings in battery 
replacement costs, reduction in overall maintenance costs for 
vehicles and ancillary equipment, and a resultant increase in 
safety for personnel. The Committee urges the Bureau to 
incorporate this technology in its ongoing purchase and 
maintenance programs for vehicles. The Bureau should report to 
the Committee by December 31, 2002, on its plans to comply with 
this direction. Beginning with the fiscal year 2004 budget 
request, the budget submission should include an accounting of 
the extent to which battery pulse technology is being employed 
and the savings expected and realized as a result of the use of 
this technology.
    Challenge cost share.--The Committee recommends $18,973,000 
for Challenge Cost share the same as the budget request. The 
$10,000,000 increase for this high-priority activity is 
included under the conservation spending category.

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $678,421,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       653,754,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       655,332,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       -23,089,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +1,578,000


    The Committee recommends $655,332,000 for wildland fire 
management $1,578,000 above the budget request and $23,089,000 
below the 2002 enacted level.
    The appropriation includes $278,639,000 for preparedness 
and fire use, of which $12,374,000 has been provided for 
deferred maintenance and capital improvement, and $8,000,000 
has been provided for the joint fire science program; 
$160,351,000 is for fire suppression operations; and 
$216,342,000 is for other operations of which $10,000,000 is 
for the rural fire assistance program, $74,935,000 is for 
hazardous fuels reduction, $111,407,000 is for the wildland 
urban interface, and $20,000,000 is for restoration and 
rehabilitation of burned over areas. Within the funds provided 
for wildland fire the Committee has included $152,000 to 
reimburse Trinity County, CA for expenses incurred in the 1999 
Lowden Fire. The Committee directs that the native plant 
restoration program and funding should be maintained at the 
fiscal year 2002 level.
    Bill Language.--Language is included under Title I General 
Provisions allowing for wildland fire activities on non-Federal 
lands. Language is included under the wildland fire management 
account allowing the fire agencies to enter into fire facility 
leases with local communities. Language is also included under 
Title III--General Provisions allowing the Secretary of the 
Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to enter into 
reciprocal agreements with foreign nations.
    The Committee is concerned about rising suppression costs 
and the lack of incentives to consider costs during a large-
fire incident. The Committee believes that cost containment 
should become more prominent among the priorities for 
suppressing wildland fires. Therefore, the Committee directs 
the Forest Service and the Department of the Interior to take 
the following steps designed to increase cost consciousness 
during such incidents: (1) directly monitor, evaluate, and 
report publicly on the costs of each large-fire incident 
following its conclusion; (2) evaluate and report on the cost 
effectiveness of all Type I and Type II incident management 
teams at the end of each fire season; (3) at the end of each 
year, evaluate and report on the fire costs of each Forest 
Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, 
Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Fish and Wildlife land unit 
experiencing large wildfires that year; and (4) establish a 
uniform, automated cost-reporting system to support these 
requirements efficiently and effectively.
    The Committee is well aware that making progress in 
containing suppression costs will require a dedicated effort by 
many Federal and non-Federal cooperators pursuing a wide range 
of coordinated and vital activities on their own lands to 
manage hazardous fuels appropriately, mitigate wildland-urban 
interface hazards, and improve the effectiveness and efficiency 
of wildland fire suppression. Clearly, the resources required 
to meet these cross-boundary needs will be more than the 
Federal government alone can supply. Therefore, the Committee 
directs the Forest Service and the Department of the Interior 
to jointly develop equitable and effective collaborative 
mechanisms for prioritizing needed activities and sharing their 
costs among the various Federal, State, local, tribal, and 
private landowners involved, including those in wildland-urban 
interface communities.
    To support development of such collaborative mechanisms, 
the Committee directs the Forest Service and the Department of 
the Interior to contract for a thorough, independent study of 
how potential mechanisms, such as a matching grant program, 
could work. This study shall consider how best to take 
advantage of relevant existing Federal programs for disaster 
mitigation, biomass utilization, and community and private fire 
protection programs. The Departments should equally share the 
cost of this study; a preliminary report should be available to 
the Committee by May 31, 2003, and the final report should be 
completed by September 30, 2003.
    The Committee is aware that the Forest Service and the four 
Interior bureaus participating in Wildland Fire Management 
activities use different systems and procedures for determining 
their readiness for control of wildfires. We have been informed 
that the Departments have been engaged in efforts to design and 
develop tools for fire program managers that would be used by 
the Forest Service and all of the Interior bureaus. The 
Committee is encouraged that the Departments have been working 
together to develop common systems to plan their activities; 
however, we are concerned that a complex system may require 
significant funding and take many years to develop.
    The Committee therefore directs the Departments to design 
and develop a focused automated system for preparedness 
resource planning to replace the systems currently in use by 
the fire management agencies. The Committee believes that a 
limited system can be designed and implemented by the end of 
fiscal year 2004. The development and design of the information 
technology system for fire preparedness will be conducted 
according to standard Federal regulations for planning, 
budgeting, acquisition and management of capital assets. The 
Committee further directs that the agencies deliver quarterly 
progress reports that describe project status and provide 
updated cost information.
    The Committee has been repeatedly disappointed with the 
inability of the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture to 
produce accurate and timely cost information regarding specific 
fire suppression projects. Agency officials have told us that 
this is the result of the use of different accounting and 
finance systems by the wildland fire management agencies. The 
Committee urges the Departments to consider the potential for 
unified accounting for the wildland fire management 
appropriation accounts in the future. The Committee recognizes 
that this would be a long-term effort. In the meantime, the 
Committee directs the agencies to establish standard coding 
practices and procedures for fire suppression activities 
beginning in fiscal year 2003. The Committee expects the 
agencies to develop a protocol that would work in each 
financial system and be followed by each agency. The protocol 
should provide clear, standard instructions for assigning cost 
codes to be used for each fire event. The protocol should be 
well understood and uniformly used by fire management and 
finance officers in each agency. The agencies will be expected 
to produce reports promptly when requested by the Committee. If 
there are any technical impediments to complying with this 
directive, agency finance officials must brief the Committee on 
those impediments and be prepared to offer alternative 
solutions to the project cost reporting problem.
    The Committee has recommended an additional appropriation 
of $200 million to cover unanticipated fiscal year 2002 
wildland fire costs for the Bureau of Land Management. The 2002 
fire season is shaping up to be one of the most catastrophic in 
recent memory. At the beginning of July the amount of forest 
and grasslands burned exceeded 3.1 million acres, a figure 
nearly triple the 10 year average for this time of year and a 
figure almost 50 percent higher than the disastrous 2000 fire 
season. Officials at the National Interagency Fire Center have 
indicated publicly that they believe the peak of the western 
fire season has yet to come and the Bureau of Land Management 
has informed the Committee that its fire suppression budget 
model indicates that $200 million above the appropriations 
currently available to the agency would be required for the 
direct cost of fighting fires during 2002. The Committee 
believes that it is essential to provide these amounts in order 
to avoid undue disruptions either in the firefighting program 
or in other Departmental programs from which funds might have 
to be diverted if appropriations are inadequate.

                    CENTRAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $9,978,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         9,978,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         9,978,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Central Hazardous Materials Fund was established to 
include funding for remedial investigations/feasibility studies 
and cleanup of hazardous waste sites for which the Department 
of the Interior is liable pursuant to the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and 
includes sums recovered from or paid by a party as 
reimbursement for remedial action or response activities.
    The Committee recommends $9,978,000 for the central 
hazardous materials fund.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $13,076,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        10,976,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        10,976,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        -2,100,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $10,976,000 for construction the 
same as the budget request and $2,100,000 below the 2002 
enacted level.

                       PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $210,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       165,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       230,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +20,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2001.............................       +65,000,000


    Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) provides for payments to 
local units of government containing certain federally owned 
lands. These payments are designed to supplement other Federal 
land receipt sharing payments that local governments may be 
receiving. Payments received may be used by the recipients for 
any governmental purpose.
    The Committee recommends $230,000,000 for PILT, of which 
$70,000,000 is derived from the conservation spending category.

                            LAND ACQUISITION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $49,920,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        44,686,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        49,286,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................          -634,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +4,600,000


    The Committee recommends $49,286,000 for land acquisition, 
an increase of $4,600,000 above the request and $634,000 below 
the enacted level. This amount includes $43,286,000 for line 
item projects, $1,500,000 for emergencies and hardships, 
$500,000 for land exchanges and $4,000,000 for acquisition 
management.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:
                                                               Committee
        Area and State                                    Recommendation
Beaver Creek Nat'l Wild & Scenic River/White Mountains 
    NRA (AK)............................................        $750,000
Black Forest Lake (CA)..................................         650,000
Carrizo Plain National Monument (CA)....................       4,350,000
Cerbat Foothills Recreation Area (AZ)...................         500,000
Continental Divide National Scenic Trail (WY)...........         536,000
Cosumnes River Watershed (CA)...........................       2,500,000
El Dorado Preserve (CA).................................       3,600,000
Golden Bair Ranch (easement*) (CO)......................       1,500,000
Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (UT)........       2,000,000
King Range National Conservation Area (CA)..............       2,000,000
Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail (ID)............       1,000,000
Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail (MT)............       1,000,000
Lower Salmon River Area of Critical Environmental 
    Concern (ID)........................................       1,000,000
Moses Coulee (WA).......................................       1,000,000
National Historic Trails of Wyoming (WY)................         200,000
Otay Mountains (CA).....................................         500,000
Patterson Bend (CA).....................................       1,000,000
Potrero Creek (CA)......................................       3,000,000
Rio Grande National Wild and Scenic River (NM)..........       4,500,000
Sandy River (OR)........................................       2,500,000
Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument 
    (CA)................................................       1,000,000
Scab Creek Special Recreation Management Area (WY)......       1,400,000
Sears Pt Area of Critical Environmental concern/Juan 
    Bautista De Anza NHT (AZ)...........................         800,000
Snake River Birds of Prey National Conservation Area 
    (ID)................................................       2,000,000
Upper Crab Creek/Rock Creek (WA)........................       1,000,000
Upper Snake/South Fork Snake River (ID).................       2,000,000
West Eugene Wetlands (OR)...............................       1,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal: Federal Acquisition projects............      43,286,000
Acquisition Management..................................       4,000,000
Emergency/Inholdings/Relocation.........................       1,500,000
Land Exchange Equalization Payment......................         500,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................      49,286,000

*Note.--Easements are subject to public access.

    Funds for the Golden Bair Ranch is conditioned on BLM 
providing public access to this property. The money for 
Consumnes River Watershed is restricted to conservation 
easements. The $1,000,000 for West Eugene Wetlands completes 
the federal share of this project.
    The land acquisition program is funded under the 
conservation spending category.

                   OREGON AND CALIFORNIA GRANT LANDS




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $105,165,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       105,633,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       105,633,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................          +468,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $105,633,000 for the Oregon and 
California grant lands the same as the budget request and 
$468,000 above the 2002 enacted level including an increase 
from the 2002 level of $1,068,000 for fixed costs and a 
decrease of $600,000 for travel. These funds are provided for 
construction and acquisition, operation and maintenance, and 
management activities on the revested lands in the 18 Oregon 
and California land grant counties of western Oregon.

                           RANGE IMPROVEMENTS




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        10,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        10,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation of not 
less than $10,000,000 to be derived from public lands receipts 
and Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act lands grazing receipts. 
Receipts are used for construction, purchase, and maintenance 
of range improvements, such as seeding, fence construction, 
weed control, water development, fish and wildlife habitat 
improvement, and planning and design of these projects.

               SERVICE CHARGES, DEPOSITS, AND FORFEITURES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $8,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         7,900,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         7,900,000
Offsetting fees.......................................        -7,900,000


    The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation 
estimated to be $7,900,000, the budget request, for service 
charges, deposits, and forfeitures. This appropriation is 
offset with fees collected under specified sections of the 
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and other Acts 
to pay for reasonable administrative and other costs in 
connection with rights-of-way applications from the private 
sector, miscellaneous cost-recoverable realty cases, timber 
contract expenses, repair of damaged lands, the adopt-a-horse 
program, and the provision of copies of official public land 
documents.

                       MISCELLANEOUS TRUST FUNDS




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $12,405,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        12,405,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        12,405,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation 
estimated to be $12,405,000, the budget request, for 
miscellaneous trust funds. The Federal Land Policy and 
Management Act of 1976 provides for the receipt and expenditure 
of moneys received as donations or gifts (section 307). Funds 
in this trust fund are derived from the administrative and 
survey costs paid by applicants for conveyance of omitted lands 
(lands fraudulently or erroneously omitted from original 
cadastral surveys), from advances for other types of surveys 
requested by individuals, and from contributions made by users 
of Federal rangelands. Amounts received from the sale of Alaska 
town lots are also available for expenses of sale and 
maintenance of town sites. Revenue from unsurveyed lands, and 
surveys of omitted lands, administrative costs of conveyance, 
and gifts and donations must be appropriated before it can be 
used.

                United States Fish and Wildlife Service

    The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is to 
conserve, protect and enhance fish and wildlife and their 
habitats for the continuing benefit of people. The Service has 
responsibility for migratory birds, threatened and endangered 
species, certain marine mammals, and land under Service 
control.
    The Service manages nearly 95 million acres across the 
United States, encompassing a 538-unit National Wildlife Refuge 
System, additional wildlife and wetlands areas, and 70 National 
Fish Hatcheries. A network of law enforcement agents and port 
inspectors enforce Federal laws for the protection of fish and 
wildlife. In fiscal year 2003, the Service will celebrate the 
100th anniversary of the establishment of the National Wildlife 
Refuge System.

                          RESOURCE MANAGEMENT




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $850,597,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       903,604,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       918,359,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +67,762,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +14,755,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $918,359,000 for resource 
management, an increase of $14,755,000 above the budget request 
and $67,762,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. Within this 
account, $60,006,000 for infrastructure improvement and 
$2,000,000 for the youth conservation corps is funded under the 
conservation spending category. Changes to the budget request 
are detailed below.
    Ecological services.--The Committee recommends $225,252,000 
for ecological services, an increase of $14,105,000 above the 
budget request.
    Within the ecological services activity, increases 
recommended for endangered species recovery programs include 
$3,000,000 for Washington State salmon grants to be 
administered through the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, 
$500,000 for manatee protection, and $1,000,000 to address the 
backlog of recovery actions.
    Changes recommended for habitat conservation programs 
include increases of $7,430,000 for the Partners for Fish and 
Wildlife program and $1,675,000 for coastal programs. The 
increase for the Partners for Fish and Wildlife program 
includes $1,000,000 to continue the nutria eradication program 
at Blackwater NWR, MD, $500,000 to continue the Columbia River 
estuary research project, $1,100,000 for bull trout 
conservation in Washington State, $1,400,000 for the Washington 
State ecosystems project, $500,000 for Georgia stream bank 
restoration, $750,000 for Walla Walla Basin habitat 
conservation planning, $1,000,000 for invasive species control, 
$1,000,000 for Spartina control in Willapa Bay, WA, and 
$180,000 in project planning to continue support for the New 
Jersey Meadowlands study. The increase for coastal programs 
includes $200,000 for the Long Live the Kings program, $175,000 
for the Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group, $300,000 is for 
the programs in Tampa Bay and the Florida panhandle, and 
$1,000,000 for new cost shared projects with an emphasis on 
invasive species control. The increase for invasive species 
control (including Spartina control) are derived from the 
conservation spending category.
    An increase of $500,000 is recommended for the 
environmental contaminants program to address the program 
backlog.
    Refuges and wildlife.--The Committee recommends 
$458,717,000 for refuges and wildlife, an increase of 
$2,000,000 above the budget request.
    Changes recommended for refuge operations and maintenance 
include an increase of $10,000,000 for refuge operations, of 
which $5,000,000 is to continue ``minimum staffing'' 
implementation, $3,000,000 is for the challenge cost share 
program for new cost shared projects with an emphasis on 
invasive species control, and $2,000,000 is for on refuge 
invasive species control using friends groups and volunteers. 
There are also decreases of $5,000,000 for the cooperative 
conservation initiative and $5,000,000 for refuge maintenance. 
The increases for challenge cost share and invasive species 
programs are derived from the conservation spending category.
    The Committee is aware that non-native invasive species are 
a serious problem for the National Wildlife Refuge System. It 
has been cited as the System's top threat in a recent survey of 
refuge managers. Invasive plants degrade the valuable habitat 
for which the refuges were created. Over the past few years, 
the number of friends groups or support organizations for 
refuges has grown to more than 200. These groups provide a 
great potential for many volunteers to assist refuge staff in 
addressing the growing threat of non-native invasive species. 
The Committee recommends that the refuge system offer its 
fullest cooperation and encouragement for these volunteer 
forces by setting priority areas for cleanup, conducting 
appropriate training, and making available the proper 
supervision, tools, and equipment necessary for friends groups 
and volunteers to be effective in fighting invasive species on 
National Wildlife Refuges.
    The Committee encourages the Service to use other programs 
to support control of invasive species in and around refuges, 
including coastal wetlands restoration grants and the partners 
for fish and wildlife program. The Committee also encourages 
the continued use of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation 
to leverage Federal funds.
    A total of $998,000, the budget request, is recommended to 
continue the Salton Sea recovery program, contingent on 
matching funds from the State of California. The Committee does 
not object to including this program in the regular operations 
account in fiscal year 2004 and beyond.
    An increase of $2,000,000 is recommended for migratory bird 
management, of which $1,000,000 is to address goose depredation 
and $1,000,000 is to continue to advance the joint venture 
programs toward the fiscal year 2004 target funding levels 
outlined in the fiscal year 2001 statement of the managers that 
accompanied the conference report for that year. The Committee 
appreciates the Service's requested increase for the joint 
ventures program in the budget request but notes that it is 
insufficient to make reasonable progress towards meeting the 
2004 target funding levels. The Committee agrees to the 
following distribution of funds for joint ventures:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year     Fiscal year     Fiscal year
                          Joint venture                                2002            2003         2004 target
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlantic Coast..................................................         506,000         626,000         800,000
Lower Mississippi...............................................         576,000         647,000         750,000
Upper Mississippi...............................................         363,000         481,000         650,000
Prairie Pothole.................................................       1,248,000       1,310,000       1,400,000
Gulf Coast......................................................         448,000         551,000         700,000
Playa Lakes.....................................................         369,000         505,000         700,000
Rainwater Basin.................................................         278,000         328,000         400,000
Intermountain West..............................................         469,000         687,000       1,000,000
Central Valley..................................................         417,000         471,000         550,000
Pacific Coast...................................................         378,000         510,000         700,000
San Francisco Bay...............................................         269,000         310,000         370,000
Sonoran.........................................................         278,000         328,000         400,000
Arctic Goose....................................................         210,000         276,000         370,000
Black Duck......................................................         188,000         263,000         370,000
Sea Duck........................................................         340,000         426,000         550,000
Administration..................................................         662,000         698,000         750,000
      Total.....................................................       6,999,000       8,417,000      10,460,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fisheries.--The Committee recommends $104,663,000 for 
fisheries, an increase of $9,900,000 above the budget request, 
including increases of $5,000,000 for hatchery operations and 
maintenance, of which $4,000,000 is for the Washington State 
hatchery improvement project and $1,000,000 is to restore the 
fiscal year 2002 level for the hatchery program, and $4,900,000 
for fish and wildlife management, of which $500,000 is to 
complete reproductive biology/salmon research at Washington 
State University, $500,000 is to restore funding for the Great 
Lakes fish and wildlife restoration program (these funds should 
remain in the base budget in future years), $2,000,000 is for 
cooperative fish passage projects, $900,000 is for 
administrative costs associated with the Sea lamprey program, 
and $1,000,000 is for aquatic nuisance control, which is 
derived from the conservation spending category. The Committee 
notes that the increase for fish passage projects is part of a 
$20,000,000 bill-wide effort to address this critical problem. 
There is also $4,000,000 recommended in the Bureau of Land 
Management and $14,000,000 recommended in the Forest Service. 
Funding for the fish passage initiative is included under the 
infrastructure improvement subcategories of the conservation 
spending category.
    General Administration.--The Committee recommends 
$129,727,000 for general administration, a decrease of 
$11,250,000 below the budget request, including increases of 
$750,000 to restore Servicewide support and $1,000,000 for a 
National Academy of Sciences review of the Service's criteria 
for State Wildlife Grants plans and of State plans and a 
decrease of $13,000,000 for the cooperative conservation 
initiative.
    The Committee has not agreed to start a new cooperative 
conservation initiative but wholeheartedly supports the concept 
of cooperative efforts to address critical habitat restoration 
and protection needs. For the Fish and Wildlife Service, the 
Committee has recommended adding funding to existing programs 
that have a proven track record in this regard. The Committee 
has also placed an emphasis on addressing invasive species 
control through cost-shared projects. Recommended increases 
include $3,000,000 for the refuge challenge cost share program, 
$2,000,000 for on refuge invasive species control projects 
using friends groups and volunteers, $1,000,000 for invasive 
species control projects under the Partners for Fish and 
Wildlife program, $1,000,000 for Spartina control in Willapa 
Bay, Washington with the expectation that the State and other 
partners will provide additional funds to address this problem, 
$1,000,000 for the coastal programs, $1,000,000 for joint 
venture programs under migratory bird management, $2,000,000 
for fish passage, and $1,000,000 for aquatic nuisance control. 
The Committee strongly encourages the Service to follow this 
model of using proven, existing programs to meet the goals of 
cooperative conservation.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The amount paid for the cost allocation methodology in 
the Resource Management account may only exceed that paid in 
fiscal year 2002 where such costs are clearly the direct result 
of increased space and increased staffing. The Service should 
consider contracting for an independent outside review of its 
cost allocation methodology by the National Academy of Public 
Administration.
    2. The Peregrine Fund should be funded at $400,000 in 
fiscal year 2003.
    3. The planning function for land acquisition has been 
transferred from the land acquisition account to the resource 
management account as proposed by the Service. The Service 
needs to establish strict criteria to evaluate new and expanded 
refuge proposals.
    4. The Service should continue to assist the Corps of 
Engineers in their comprehensive review of alternative 
approaches to preserving the Meadowlands wetlands area in 
northern New Jersey and the Committee has provided $180,000 for 
this purpose. The Service should include the necessary funds 
for this effort in future budget submissions.
    5. The Service should continue its support and increase 
funding for joint venture programs in order to achieve the 
target funding level by fiscal year 2004. This program 
continues to be one of the greatest successes of the Service; 
with funding leveraged to a greater extent than all other 
Service programs combined.
    6. The Committee continues to be concerned about the 
Service's inability to complete its strategic plan for 
fisheries. In answer to a hearing question for the record, the 
Service responded by reporting on the status of a plan for 
hatcheries. The continuing emphasis on hatcheries rather than 
on habitat protection and restoration has been a continuing 
problem with the fisheries program.
    7. The Committee strongly supports the Service's efforts to 
obtain reimbursement from the Bureau of Reclamation for 
mitigation production at the Jones Hole NFH and the Hotchkiss 
NFH. Those funds should be used to address the most critical 
hatchery maintenance needs.
    8. The proposed program reduction for hatcheries is 
rejected without prejudice. Such proposals in the future must 
be in the context of the strategic plan for fisheries and must 
be fully explained and justified in the budget request before 
the Committee will consider them.
    9. The Committee supports the consolidation of the 
Service's Diversity and Civil Rights Division. This is the type 
of specific management reform that should be pursued by the 
Service and the Department rather than assessing arbitrary 
funding reductions against all programs. The Committee also 
supports the limited use of funds by the Service to contract 
for employment-related legal services.
    10. Support costs managed at the regional office and 
headquarters levels must be budgeted under the regional office 
operations and headquarters operations line items. No 
assessments or ``cross-charges'' should be imposed on program 
accounts to cover these costs or costs associated with regional 
or headquarters initiatives.
    11. The Service should continue to support the Forest 
Service's Carhart Center at the same level as in fiscal year 
2002.
    12. The ongoing drought in the Southwest continues to place 
certain species recovery programs in jeopardy. The Committee 
compliments the Service for moving towards increased Silvery 
minnow captive breeding efforts rather than relying solely on 
river habitat as in the past. The Service should expand these 
options to other streams throughout the Southwest.
    13. Last year the Congress directed an independent review 
of the science committee review on the progress of the Mexican 
gray wolf reintroduction program in New Mexico and Arizona. The 
Service has not complied with that direction. Questions of 
potential conflicts of interest and other controversies 
surrounding the program could further damage the recovery 
effort if an independent review is not undertaken. The 
Committee recognizes that there has been some improvement in 
the program's relationships with local governments and 
citizens, but previous program decisions have resulted in 
significant distrust of the Service's management of the 
program. The Service should continue to work closely with 
impacted local communities and their elected officials. The 
Committee is concerned that the Service appears to approach the 
wolf reintroduction program as a public relations exercise and 
overstates the success of the program rather than resolving 
problems and issues. The Service should consult with the 
Committee on how it will fund additional USDA Wildlife Services 
personnel in the future and on any plans to deviate from the 
original wolf reintroduction plan. The Committee also expects 
the Service to oppose strongly third party lawsuits aimed at 
adding additional costly requirements for reintroduction 
program operations on local ranchers.
    14. The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings 
and positive environmental benefits achieved by the military 
through the implementation of pulse technology as a major 
component of its battery management programs. The Committee 
believes that the Fish and Wildlife Service would also benefit 
significantly and directly from the use of this technology to 
extend the life of vehicle batteries. These benefits include 
savings in battery replacement costs, reduction in overall 
maintenance costs for vehicles and ancillary equipment, and a 
resultant increase in safety for personnel. The Committee urges 
the Service to incorporate this technology in its ongoing 
purchase and maintenance programs for vehicles. The Service 
should report to the Committee by December 31, 2002, on its 
plans to comply with this direction. Beginning with the fiscal 
year 2004 budget request, the budget submission should include 
an accounting of the extent to which battery pulse technology 
is being employed and the savings expected and realized as a 
result of the use of this technology.
    15. The Committee encourages the United States Fish and 
Wildlife Service to support the Caddo Lake Ramsar Wetlands 
Science project within the increases provided by the Committee 
for resource management. The Caddo Lake wetlands are classified 
as Resource Category 1 wetlands by the United States Fish and 
Wildlife Service and provide habitat for a number of endangered 
species. Further, this project will develop model programs for 
community-based and locally-designed wetlands conservation.
    Bill language.--The Committee recommends bill language 
permitting the limited use of funds for incidental expenses 
related to promoting and celebrating the Refuge Centennial. The 
Committee understands that these expenses will be cost-shared 
by friends groups and other private contributions.
    Bill language is also included, under General Provisions, 
Department of the Interior, requiring the Service to implement 
fully the fish marking program related to efforts to preserve 
endangered species of salmon. This action has been taken 
because of the significant endangered species benefits derived 
from applying a visual mark to hatchery fish, most notably the 
ability to monitor easily and manage hatchery stray rates, and 
to differentiate hatchery fish from natural fish for broodstock 
management and stock assessment purposes. The Committee expects 
the Service to be a full participant in this effort by ensuring 
that hatchery fish that are suitable/available for selective 
fisheries are visually marked to assist in the identification 
and recovery of wild salmonid stocks.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $55,543,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        35,402,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        51,308,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        -4,235,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +15,906,000


    The Committee recommends $51,308,000 for construction, a 
decrease of $4,235,000 below the fiscal year 2002 level and 
$15,906,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
funds:

                                             [Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Budget      Committee
                  Project                             Description            request  recommendation  Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bear River NWR, UT.........................  Dikes and related facilities          0        1,000         1,000
                                              [cc].
Big Branch Marsh NWR, LA...................  Restroom/support facility [c]         0          150           150
Bitter Lake NWR, NM........................  Visitor center/standard               0        1,950         1,950
                                              design [d/c].
Black-Footed Ferret Wildlife Research Ctr,   Endangered species facility       3,240        3,240             0
 CO.                                          [cc].
Bosque del Apache NWR, NM..................  Equipment for salt cedar              0          400           400
                                              control.
Bozeman Fish Technology Center, MT.........  Seismic safety/3 building           150          150             0
                                              rehab [p/d].
Bozeman Fish Technology Center, MT.........  Laboratory/administration           500          500             0
                                              building [c].
Bridge Safety Inspections (Servicewide)....  .............................       560          560             0
Clark R. Bavin Forensics Laboratory, OR....  Security upgrades............       765          765             0
Clark R. Bavin Forensics Laboratory, OR....  Forensics laboratory              6,235        6,235             0
                                              expansion [c].
Craig Brook NFH, ME........................  Wastewater treatment                200          200             0
                                              compliance [p].
Dam Safety Program (Servicewide)...........  .............................     1,365        1,365             0
D. C. Booth NFH, SD........................  Exhibits for visitor center..         0          550           550
Harris Neck NWR, GA........................  Office renovation............         0          350           350
Iron River NFH, WI.........................  Replace domes at Schacte          2,000        2,000             0
                                              Creek [cc].
Jackson NFH, WY............................  Seismic safety rehabilitation        80           80             0
                                              [d].
Jordon River NFH, MI.......................  M/V Togue/Great Lakes               800          800             0
                                              stocking vessel [d].
Klamath Basin NWR complex, CA..............  Water supply and management..     1,000        1,000             0
Northwest Power Planning Area..............  Fish screens, etc............         0        4,000         4,000
Orangeburg NFH, SC.........................  Orangeburg substation dam         4,144        4,144             0
                                              [cc].
Ottawa NWR, OH.............................  Visitor center/standard           1,100        1,950           850
                                              design [d/c].
Quilcene NFH, WA...........................  Seismic safety rehab of              45           45             0
                                              hatchery building [d].
Sachuest Point NWR, RI.....................  Exhibits for visitor center..         0          250           250
Savannah NWR, GA...........................  Visitor center/standard           1,100        1,950           850
                                              design [d/c].
Security upgrades (Servicewide)............  .............................     1,700        1,700             0
Shawangunk NWR, NY.........................  Demolish runways [p/d].......         0          300           300
Sonny Bono Salton Sea NWR, CA..............  Seismic safety rehab of shop        200          200             0
                                              building [cc].
Visitor Contact Stations...................  Several locations/standard            0        2,000         2,000
                                              design.
Wolf Creek NFH, KY.........................  Visitor center [cc]..........         0        1,800         1,800
                                            --------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Line Item Construction.....  .............................    25,184       39,634        14,450
                                            ====================================================================
Nationwide Engineering Services:
    Cost Allocation Methodology............  .............................     3,000        3,000             0
    Environmental Compliance Management....  .............................     1,400        1,856           456
    Seismic Safety Program.................  .............................       200          200             0
    Waste Prevention and Recycling.........  .............................       150          150             0
    Other Engineering Services.............  .............................     5,468        6,468         1,000
                                            --------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Nationwide Engineering       .............................    10,218       11,674         1,456
       Services.
                                            ====================================================================
      Total................................  .............................    35,402       51,308        15,906
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. No administrative or other assessments may be levied 
against individual projects. All administrative overhead should 
be budgeted in the nationwide engineering services activity or 
in the general operations activity under Resource Management. 
This instruction also applies to funds available from prior 
years.
    2. The Committee has recommended restoring funds for the 
Service's demolition and environmental compliance needs. These 
funds should be continued and increased, as needed, in future 
budget requests.
    3. The Committee strongly supports the standardized design 
approach for visitor centers and visitor contact stations, and 
the efforts of Friends Groups and others to provide cost 
sharing for these facilities. The Committee recommends 
providing the full Federal share of funding for 3 facilities--
Ottawa NWR, Savannah NWR, and Bitter Lake NWR--with the 
understanding that each of these projects will be supplemented 
with private funds.
    4. The Service should use prior year balances from 
completed projects to complete the exhibits at the Great Falls 
Discovery Center in Turner Falls, MA. This is a cooperative 
effort between the Silvio O. Conte National Wildlife Refuge, 
the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management, and 
seven other partners. The Committee understands that no more 
than $200,000 will be used to complete these exhibits.
    Bill language is recommended to permit the Service to enter 
into a contract for the full scope of the Clark R. Bavin 
Forensics Laboratory, OR expansion effort.

                            LAND ACQUISITION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $99,135,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        70,384,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        82,250,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       -16,885,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +11,866,000


    The Committee recommends $82,250,000 for land acquisition, 
an increase of $11,866,000 above the budget request and 
$16,885,000 below the enacted level. This amount includes 
$64,750,000 for line item projects, $2,000,000 for inholdings, 
$2,000,000 for emergencies and hardships, $1,000,000 for 
exchanges, $2,500,000 for cost allocation methodology and 
$10,000,000 for acquisition management.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:
                                                               Committee
        Area and State                                    Recommendation
Alaska Peninsula NWR (TDX) (AK).........................      $2,500,000
Baca Ranch (CO).........................................       5,000,000
Back Bay NWR (VA).......................................       1,000,000
Balconies/Canyonlands NWR (TX)..........................       1,000,000
Buenos Aires NWR (AZ)...................................         500,000
Cahaba River NWR (AL)...................................       3,000,000
Cat Island NWR (LA).....................................       2,500,000
Dakota Tallgrass Prairie WMA (ND/SD)....................       1,000,000
Detroit River NWR (MI)..................................       3,500,000
Edwin B. Forsythe NWR (NJ)..............................       2,250,000
Great Meadows NWR (MA)..................................       1,600,000
Great Swamp NWR (NJ)....................................       1,000,000
J.N. ``Ding'' Darling NWR (FL)..........................       3,000,000
Lower Suwannee NWR (FL).................................       1,000,000
Minnesota Valley NWR (MN)...............................       4,000,000
National Key Deer Refuge (FL)...........................       1,000,000
Northern Tallgrass Prairie NWR (MN/IA)..................       1,000,000
Ottawa NWR (OH).........................................         500,000
Pelican Island NWR (FL).................................       1,750,000
Pond Creek NWR (AR).....................................       1,000,000
Prime Hook NWR (DE).....................................       1,350,000
Quinault Indian Reservation (WA)........................       5,000,000
Rappahannock River Valley NWA (VA)......................       3,000,000
Red River NWR (LA)......................................         500,000
San Diego NWR (CA)......................................       2,000,000
San Joaquin River NWR (CA)..............................       2,500,000
Savannah NWR (GA) Mulberry Grove........................       4,000,000
Silvio O. Conte NFWR (VT/NH/MA/CT)......................       1,000,000
St. Marks NWR (FL)......................................       2,000,000
Stewart B. McKinney NWR (CT)............................       1,000,000
Trinity River NWR (TX)..................................         500,000
Wallkill River NWR (NJ/NY)..............................       2,300,000
Western Montana Project (MT)............................         750,000
Willapa NWR (WA)........................................         750,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal: Federal Acquisition projects............     $64,750,000
Acquisition Management..................................      10,000,000
Emergency & Hardship....................................       2,000,000
Exchanges...............................................       1,000,000
Inholdings..............................................       2,000,000
Cost Allocation Methodology.............................       2,500,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................     $82,250,000

    The Committee was disappointed with the Service's fiscal 
year 2003 budget submission and continues to encourage the 
Service to institute much needed reforms in the acquisition 
priority system.
    The land acquisition program is funded under the 
conservation spending category.

                      LANDOWNER INCENTIVE PROGRAM

    The Landowner Incentive program provides funds to States, 
territories and tribes for matching, competitively awarded 
grants to establish or supplement landowner incentive programs 
that provide technical and financial assistance to private 
landowners. The purpose of these incentive programs is to 
restore and protect habitat of Federally listed, proposed or 
candidate species under the Endangered Species Act, or other at 
risk species on private lands. Eligible grantees include the 
States, the District of Columbia, Indian Tribes, Puerto Rico, 
Guam, the U. S. Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, 
and American Samoa.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $40,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        50,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        40,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       -10,000,000


    The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for the landowner 
incentive program, a $10,000,000 decrease from the budget 
request and equal to the 2002 level. The Committee has not 
agreed to increase funding for this program for two reasons: 
(1) the fiscal year 2002 funds have not yet been spent and (2) 
many of these projects should qualify for funds under the 
recently enacted farm bill. One key purpose of the landowner 
incentive program, as reported by the Service, is restoration 
of marginal farmlands to wetlands and the Service should work 
closely with the Department of Agriculture to ensure projects 
funded under the farm bill complement and supplement the 
Service's landowner programs to the maximum extent possible.

                           STEWARDSHIP GRANTS

    The private stewardship grants program provides grants and 
other assistance to individuals and groups engaged in local, 
private, and voluntary conservation efforts that benefit 
federally listed, proposed or candidate species, or other at 
risk species.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        10,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        10,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the private 
stewardship grants program, the same as the budget request and 
the fiscal year 2002 level.

            COOPERATIVE ENDANGERED SPECIES CONSERVATION FUND

    Eighty percent of the habitat for more than half of the 
listed endangered and threatened species is on private land. 
The Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund provides 
grants to States and territories for endangered species 
recovery actions on non-Federal lands and provides funds for 
non-Federal land acquisition to facilitate habitat protection. 
Individual States and territories provide 25 percent of grant 
project costs. Cost sharing is reduced to 10 percent when two 
or more States or territories are involved in a project.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $96,235,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        91,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       121,400,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +25,165,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +30,400,000


    The Committee recommends $121,400,000 for the cooperative 
endangered species conservation fund, an increase of 
$30,400,000 above the budget request and $25,165,000 above the 
2002 level. Increases include $30,000,000 for habitat 
conservation plan land acquisition and $400,000 for 
administration. The recommended level is necessary to address 
the growing demand for HCP land acquisition. This program is 
funded under the conservation spending category.
    Bill language is recommended to derive the HCP land 
acquisition portion of this account from the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund, instead of deriving the entire funding from 
the LWCF as proposed in the budget request.

                     NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE FUND

    Through this program the Service makes payments to counties 
in which Service lands are located, based on their fair market 
value. Payments to counties are estimated to be $26,528,000 in 
fiscal year 2003 with $19,414,000 derived from this 
appropriation and $7,114,000 from net refuge receipts estimated 
to be collected in fiscal year 2002.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $14,414,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        14,414,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        19,414,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +5,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +5,000,000


    The Committee recommends $19,414,000 for the National 
wildlife refuge fund, an increase of $5,000,000 above both the 
budget request and the fiscal year 2002 funding level. Within 
the amount recommended, $5,000,000 is derived from the 
conservation spending category.
    The Committee continues to be concerned about the 
priorities of the Service with respect to meeting its 
obligations under the National wildlife refuge fund. The 
Committee strongly disagrees with the Service's emphasis on 
acquiring more land without commensurate funding increases for 
the national wildlife refuge fund. Refuge revenue sharing 
payments have dropped from 66 percent of the authorized level 
in 1998 to 55 percent in 2002. With the $5,000,000 increase 
recommended by the Committee, the payments will be raised to 70 
percent of the authorized level.

               NORTH AMERICAN WETLANDS CONSERVATION FUND

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, through the North 
American Wetlands Conservation Fund, leverages partner 
contributions for wetlands conservation. Projects to date have 
been in 48 States, 10 Canadian provinces, 21 Mexican states and 
the U.S. Virgin Islands. In addition to this appropriation, the 
Service receives funding from receipts in the Federal Aid in 
Wildlife Restoration account from taxes on firearms, 
ammunition, archery equipment, pistols and revolvers, and from 
the Sport Fish Restoration account from taxes on fishing tackle 
and equipment, electric trolling motors and fish finders and 
certain marine gasoline taxes. By law, sport fish restoration 
receipts are used for coastal wetlands in States bordering the 
Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, States bordering the Great Lakes, 
Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, the Commonwealth of the 
Northern Mariana Islands, the freely associated States in the 
Pacific, and American Samoa.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $43,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        43,560,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        43,560,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................           +60,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $43,560,000 for the North American 
wetlands conservation fund, equal to the budget request and an 
increase of $60,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. This 
program is funded under the conservation spending category.
    The Committee expects the Service to institute 
administrative reforms in the North American wetlands 
conservation program. Specifically, the number of site visits 
by Council staff should be reduced and only one person should 
be sent to a site visit (two are sent now). In addition, the 
Service should not pay airfare for Council staff to attend 
Council meetings and more Council meetings should be conducted 
in the Washington, D.C. area. The savings from these reforms 
should be directed toward systematic monitoring of completed 
projects; periodic audits of grantees; evaluation of the 
biological effectiveness of the NAWCA program; and implementing 
an electronic grants process. The Service should report to the 
Committee no later than January 31, 2003, on its plans to 
implement these reforms and should report annually in the 
budget justification on progress in this area.
    Bill Language is continued specifying that the increase 
above the fiscal year 2001 level is to be devoted to projects 
in the United States. The Committee has recommended continuing 
this language based upon the large number of high priority 
unfunded project applications in the U.S. as compared with 
project applications from Canada and Mexico.

                NEOTROPICAL MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION

    The Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act of 2000 
authorizes grants for the conservation of neotropical migratory 
birds in the United States, Latin America and the Caribbean, 
with 75 percent of the amounts available to be expended on 
projects outside the U.S. There is a three to one matching 
requirement under this program.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................                 0
Recommended, 2003.....................................         5,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +2,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +5,000,000


    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the neotropical 
migratory bird conservation program, an increase of $5,000,000 
above the budget request and $2,000,000 above the 2002 level. 
The Administration proposed $1,000,000 for this program as part 
of the multinational species conservation fund. This program is 
funded under the conservation spending category.
    This program provides critically needed resources for 
conservation of neotropical migratory birds. The Committee 
expects the Service to continue to administer this grant 
program through the Service's division of bird habitat 
conservation, following the model of the North American 
wetlands conservation program, and in close coordination with 
the Service's international program.

                MULTINATIONAL SPECIES CONSERVATION FUND

    This account combines funding for programs under the former 
rewards and operations (African elephant) account, the former 
rhinoceros and tiger conservation account, the Asian elephant 
conservation program, and the great ape conservation program.
    The African Elephant Act of 1988 established a fund for 
assisting nations and organizations involved with conservation 
of African elephants. The Service provides grants to African 
Nations and to qualified organizations and individuals to 
protect and manage critical populations of these elephants.
    The Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994 
authorized programs to enhance compliance with the Convention 
on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and U.S. 
or foreign laws prohibiting the taking or trade of rhinoceros, 
tigers or their habitat.
    The Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997 authorized a 
grant program, similar to the African elephant program, to 
enable cooperators from regional and range country agencies and 
organizations to address Asian elephant conservation problems. 
The world's surviving populations of wild Asian elephants are 
found in 13 south and southeastern Asian countries.
    The Great Ape Conservation Act of 2000 authorized grants to 
foreign government, the CITES secretariat, and non-governmental 
organizations for the conservation of great apes.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $4,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         5,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         4,800,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................          +800,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................          -200,000


    The Committee recommends $4,800,000 for the multinational 
species conservation fund, an increase of $800,000 above the 
fiscal year 2002 level and $200,000 below the budget request. 
Changes to the budget request include a decrease of $1,000,000 
for neotropical migratory birds (which is funded in a separate 
account) and an increase of $800,000, which includes $200,000 
each for African elephant conservation, rhinoceros and tiger 
conservation, Asian elephant conservation, and great ape 
conservation. The Committee expects these funds to be matched 
by non-Federal funding to leverage private contributions to the 
maximum extent possible. This program is funded under the 
conservation spending category.

                         STATE WILDLIFE GRANTS

    The State wildlife grant program provides funds for States 
to develop and implement wildlife management and habitat 
restoration for the most critical wildlife needs in each State. 
States are required to develop comprehensive wildlife 
conservation plans to be eligible for grants and to provide at 
least a 25 percent cost share for planning grants and at least 
a 50 percent cost share for implementation grants. This program 
is funded under the conservation spending category.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $60,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        60,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       100,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +40,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +40,000,000


    The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for State wildlife 
grants, an increase of $40,000,000 above both the budget 
request and the 2002 level, after adjusting for the $25,000,000 
rescission in the 2002 Act. Within the amount provided, 
$5,000,000 is for competitively awarded grants to Indian 
tribes.
    The Committee notes that the State wildlife grants program 
has had numerous problems with implementation over the past two 
years and reminds the Service that the centerpiece to a strong 
program must be solid, scientifically-based State plans. These 
plans should address the conservation of each State's or 
eligible entity's full array of wildlife and stress on the 
ground restoration and protection of habitat for the species of 
greatest concern. State plans should not be approved if they do 
not meet the standards set by the Service.
    The Committee has recommended a $1,000,000 increase in the 
Service's resource management appropriation for the Service to 
contract with the National Academy of Sciences to ensure that 
the criteria established by the Service for State plans under 
the State wildlife grants program are appropriate and that 
those standards are strictly adhered to in each State plan. The 
Service should proceed with the distribution of funds and the 
implementation of the program. There should be no disruption or 
delay pending the Academy's review.
    Each State or eligible entity has two years to enter into 
specific grant agreements with the Service using fiscal year 
2003 funding. If funds remain unobligated at the end of fiscal 
year 2004, the unobligated funds will be reapportioned to all 
States and eligible entities, together with any new 
appropriations provided in fiscal year 2005.
    Not more than 3 percent of the appropriated amount may be 
used for Federal administration of the program. Administrative 
costs for each grantee should also be held to a minimum so that 
the maximum amount of funding is used for on-the-ground 
projects.

                         National Park Service

    The mission of the National Park Service is to preserve 
unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the 
national park system for the enjoyment, education, and 
inspiration of this and future generations. The National Park 
Service cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of 
natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor 
recreation throughout this country and the world.
    The National Park Service, established in 1916, has 
stewardship responsibilities for the protection and 
preservation of the heritage resources of the National Park 
System. The system, consisting of 385 separate and distinct 
units, is recognized globally as a leader in park management 
and resource preservation. The national park system represents 
much of the finest the Nation has to offer in terms of scenery, 
historical and archeological relics, and cultural heritage. 
Through its varied sites, the National Park Service attempts to 
explain America's history, interpret its culture, preserve 
examples of its natural ecosystems, and provide recreational 
and educational opportunities for U.S. citizens and visitors 
from all over the world. In addition, the National Park Service 
provides support to tribal, local, and State governments to 
preserve culturally significant, ecologically important, and 
public recreational lands.

                 OPERATION OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................    $1,487,075,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................     1,584,565,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................     1,605,593,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................      +118,518,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +21,028,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $1,605,593,000 for the operation 
of the National Park System for fiscal year 2003, an increase 
of $21,028,000 above the budget request and $118,518,000 above 
the enacted level. The Committee has provided an additional 
$21,028,000 in new funds and redirected $15,000,000 of the 
funds proposed for a new initiative to pay the full amount 
needed for uncontrollable expenses, to restore the $4,000,000 
for CESI, and to provide a $20,000,000 base increase for the 
parks.
    While the Committee commends the Administration for 
providing substantial increases in the repair/rehabilitation 
and cyclic accounts to prevent new backlog maintenance needs 
and to maintain recently refurbished projects, there is still 
concern that the parks basic operational budgets have seriously 
eroded over time. This is one of the reasons that the Committee 
has supported the development of business plans. The Committee 
encourages the Administration to consider the parks' 
operational shortfalls along with the backlog maintenance needs 
in the 2004 budget submission.
    The Committee expects that the $20,000,000 increase be 
spent exclusively on park base increases and the nationally 
designated trails with only one exception. The Service may 
spend up to $750,000 to expand the Business Plan program. The 
Committee continues to be pleased by the improvements and 
refinements that the Service is making on this initiative. The 
Committee expects that some of this new funding will be used 
for salaries and training costs to initiate a formal intake 
program to attract more of these exceptional students to 
permanent employment within the Park Service. These students 
possess the training and skills in disciplines that are too 
rare in the Service. The Committee encourages the Service to 
continue working with the National Parks Conservation 
Association to attain additional private funding to further 
advance this program.
    Resource Stewardship.--The Committee recommends 
$346,320,000 for resource stewardship, an increase of 
$11,397,000 above the request and $28,008,000 above the enacted 
level. Included in this amount are increases above the enacted 
level of $6,658,000 for base operations, $6,900,000 for 
inventory and monitoring, $4,250,000 to accelerate natural 
resource inventories, $3,100,000 to assess watershed 
conditions, $500,000 to monitor water quality in parks, 
$200,000 for water resource protection and restoration, 
$400,000 for additional cooperative ecosystem study units, 
$2,150,000 for native and exotic species management, $500,000 
to complete resource projects in Alaska, and $4,450,000 for 
uncontrollable increases. Programmatic decreases include a 
reduction of $100,000 for greenspace for living, and a general 
travel reduction of $1,000,000.
    The $4,000,000 to continue the critical ecosystems studies 
initiative in the Everglades has been retained. In addition, 
the Committee does not accept the proposed language requiring 
$9,000,000 to be provided as reimbursement to USGS for Natural 
Resource Challenge related programs and activities. The 
Committee understands that USGS has been a partner in the 
Challenge and that many Challenge activities are appropriately 
carried out using USGS. However, the Committee believes that 
USGS should continue to be used as the vendor or partner of 
choice where it is the best source for completing the work as 
determined by the Park Service natural resource managers. The 
Committee directs that funding for the Challenge only be 
reimbursed for the same types of activities previously carried 
out by USGS and not be used where other sources can provide and 
have provided similar services and products efficiently in the 
past.
    Visitor Services.--The Committee recommends $322,664,000 
for visitor services, an increase of $12,983,000 above the 
budget request and $25,573,000 above the enacted level. 
Included in this amount are increases above the enacted level 
of $13,505,000 for base increases, $5,617,000 for counter 
terrorism, $1,500,000 for concessions management, and 
$7,528,000 for uncontrollable expenses. Programmatic decreases 
include $880,000 for one time 2002 Winter Olympics funding and 
a general travel reduction of $1,697,000.
    Maintenance.--The Committee recommends $539,660,000 for 
maintenance, an increase of $8,232,000 above the request and 
$58,459,000 above the enacted level. Included in this amount 
are increases above the enacted level of $7,509,000 for base 
increases, $481,000 for counter terrorism, $500,000 for project 
management information systems, $1,000,000 for a strategic 
business advisor, $8,400,000 for repair and rehabilitation, 
$7,640,000 for condition assessments, $1,600,000 for facility 
maintenance software system, $25,000,000 for cyclic maintenance 
and $8,171,000 for uncontrollable expenses. There is a 
programmatic decrease of $1,842,000 for travel.
    Within funds available for the repair/rehabilitation and 
cyclic maintenance accounts, the Service should provide 
$233,000 for the Bachlott House and $45,000 for the St. Mary's 
Museum at Cumberland Island NS, $400,000 to repair historic 
structures at Great Smokey Mountains NP and $200,000 for 
repairs at Belle Haven Marina within the George Washington 
Memorial Parkway.
    Park Support.--The Committee recommends $288,713,000 for 
park support, a decrease of $11,584,000 below the request and 
$13,688,000 above the enacted level. Included in this amount 
are increases above the enacted level of $1,659,000 for base 
increases, $7,000,000 for the existing challenge cost share 
program, $700,000 for servicewide IT planning and management, 
$100,000 for Glen Canyon Dam adaptive management, and 
$5,457,000 for uncontrollable expenses. There is a programmatic 
decrease of $1,228,000 for travel. The $7,000,000 challenge 
cost share increase is funded under the conservation spending 
category.
    The Committee expects the Service to continue to allocate 
one third of the funds provided for the challenge cost share 
program to the National Trails System. The Committee also 
directs the Service to provide $1,000,000 to support work on 
the creation of an integrated ``Geographic Information System'' 
(GIS) for the National Trail System.
    External Administrative Costs.--The Committee recommends 
$108,236,000 for external administrative costs, the same as the 
budget request and $2,888,000 above the enacted level. Included 
in this amount is an increase above the enacted level of 
$2,888,000 for fixed costs.
    South Florida Initiative.--The Committee is concerned about 
recent efforts to alter significantly the Interim Operational 
Plan (IOP) for the protection of the Cape Sable Seaside 
Sparrow. The proposed new plan appears to pose significant 
threats to the park, in the form of water pollution and 
disruption of natural water flows, and may compromise the 
ability to move forward with true restoration. The Committee is 
concerned that the proposed IOP may not be operated in a way 
that is consistent with the authorized purposes of the modified 
water deliveries and C-111 projects.
    The Committee directs the Everglades National Park to 
prepare a comprehensive report concerning possible impacts of 
the proposed IOP on water quality in the park, and the 
preservation and restoration of natural hydrologic regimes. The 
report must be submitted to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations by September 30, 2003. The Service is also 
directed to list the IOP project components and their funding 
sources. This report should be submitted by December 1, 2002.
    The Committee has included bill language under the 
Service's land acquisition account directing the expeditious 
completion of the flood protection system for the 8.5 square 
mile area and clarifying that Congress intended the Army Corps 
of Engineers to implement a flood protection system known as 
``alternative 6D'' which combines both land acquisition within 
the 8.5 square mile area and construction of an interior levee 
and seepage canal to provide the necessary flood protection to 
the 8.5 square mile area.
    In addition, consistent with the Committee's longheld 
position that, to ensure true restoration of the natural 
system, it is imperative that the Secretary of the Interior 
have a co-equal role with the Army Corps of Engineers and the 
State of Florida, bill language is included under General 
Provisions, Department of the Interior mandating that the 
Secretary of the Interior be a full partner on the interagency 
RECOVER team. This is done to ensure that the Interior 
Department's technical expertise is fully incorporated and that 
the primary Federal interest in the Comprehensive Plan, the 
restoration of the Everglades, is achieved.
    Park Construction.--The Committee continues to be concerned 
about the scope and cost of visitor facilities proposed by the 
Service. Given the magnitude of the deferred maintenance 
backlog, it is crucial that all levels of Park Service 
leadership take responsibility for assuring that projects are 
conceptualized with the needs of the rest of the system taken 
into consideration. Currently, the Service appears to condone 
the practice of superintendents and planners seeking funding 
for construction projects outside of the Service's own 
construction priority setting process. While these attempts, 
may in some cases be successful, they are accomplished at the 
expense of their colleagues' projects which are included in the 
budget request and removed to accommodate lower priority 
projects.
    While OMB and the Service often mistakenly view these 
substitutions as Congressional add-ons or earmarks, it is 
important to recognize that the entire line item construction 
program is earmarked by the Administration in the annual budget 
submission and that, as mentioned above, many ``earmarks'' are 
initiated at the park level. If the Service is truly interested 
in seeing its priorities followed, it must become more 
proactive in admonishing and disciplining the internal 
proponents of projects that are presented to Congress outside 
of the budget process.
    Partnerships.--The Committee continues to support the use 
of partnerships to achieve park goals. However, given the 
backlog maintenance needs and operational shortfalls of the 
parks, the Committee encourages the Service to be cautious 
about increasing funding and new staffing to achieve this 
purpose. The Service has many existing employees who are 
accomplished at developing strong partnerships and the 
Committee encourages the Service to use this internal 
expertise.
    The Committee has had a great deal of experience with the 
larger, expensive partnership projects, which include some 
successes and failures. Based on this experience, the Committee 
makes the following observations and suggestions. Ideas for 
good partnerships don't always have to originate with the park 
but they should further a park priority. The Service should 
consult and communicate with partners and Service leadership 
but also with the Committee before large-scale project 
commitments are made. When sharing expenses for a building, the 
Service should be cautious about starting a project before all 
funds are in hand--both the Federal and non-Federal 
contributions. Finally the Service should make sure that the 
partnership agreement is in writing. There have been many 
instances where the project scope changes and the partners and 
the Committee have a different recollection of the original 
commitment.
    Other.--The Committee supports the decision by Ozark 
National Scenic Riverways to retain the carpentry and 
maintenance positions at the park. The Committee recognizes the 
urgent needs at ONSR for key carpentry and maintenance 
personnel who have specialized skills in properly maintaining 
park facilities. The Committee expects that these carpentry and 
maintenance positions will be retained.
    The Committee urges the Service to give priority 
consideration to provide sufficient funds for necessary 
repairs, maintenance, facility improvements and staffing at the 
Wright Brothers National Memorial and Cape Hatteras National 
Seashore in preparation for the First Flight Centennial 
celebration.
    The Service should continue to support the Carhart Center 
at the same level as provided in fiscal year 2002.
    The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 
positive environmental benefits achieved by the military 
through the implementation of pulse technology as a major 
component of its battery management programs. The Committee 
believes that the National Park Service would also benefit 
significantly and directly from the use of this technology to 
extend the life of vehicle batteries. These benefits include 
savings in battery replacement costs, reduction in overall 
maintenance costs for vehicles and ancillary equipment, and a 
resultant increase in safety for personnel. The Committee urges 
the Service to incorporate this technology in its ongoing 
purchase and maintenance programs for vehicles. The Service 
should report to the Committee by December 31, 2002, on its 
plans to comply with this direction. Beginning with the fiscal 
year 2004 budget request, the budget submission should include 
an accounting of the extent to which battery pulse technology 
is being employed and the savings expected and realized as a 
result of the use of this technology.
    The Committee is aware of recent developments relating to 
the identification of the site of the first official residence 
of the President of the United States at the current location 
of Independence National Historic Park in Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania. It has been discovered that George Washington and 
his household, including eight African American slaves, were 
quartered at the first Executive Mansion for six and one half 
years. Therefore, given the historical significance of this 
issue, the Committee urges the National Park Service to 
appropriately commemorate the concerns raised regarding the 
recognition of the existence of the Mansion and the slaves who 
worked in it during the first years of our democracy. 
Furthermore the Committee directs the Director of the National 
Park Service to submit a report to the Committee no later than 
March 31, 2003, detailing the actions taken at Independence 
National Historic Park to properly address and resolve this 
issue.
    The Committee urges the National Park Service to continue 
making the War for Freedom Project a priority. The War for 
Freedom Project, a collaboration between the National Park 
Foundation, the University of Maryland and the National Park 
Service is a national, internet based curriculum to help 
students at all levels better understand the Civil War Period 
using letters written by African Americans and National Park 
Service War sites as resources.
    Bill language is included which prohibits the creation of a 
new Associate Director for Law Enforcement, Protective and 
Emergency Service.

                       UNITED STATES PARK POLICE




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $90,555,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        78,431,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        78,431,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       -12,124,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $78,431,000 for the United States 
Park Police, the same as the budget request and a decrease of 
$12,124,000 below the enacted level. The decrease below 2002 
reflects one time security enhancement costs.

                  NATIONAL RECREATION AND PRESERVATION

    The National recreation and preservation appropriation 
provides for the outdoor recreation planning, preservation of 
cultural and National heritage resources, technical assistance 
to Federal, State and local agencies, administration of 
Historic Preservation Fund grants and statutory and contractual 
aid.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $66,159,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        46,824,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        56,330,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        -9,829,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +9,506,000


    The Committee recommends $56,330,000 for national 
recreation and preservation, an increase of $9,506,000 above 
the request and $9,829,000 below the enacted level.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimate by activity are shown in the following table:


    Recreation programs.--The Committee recommends $552,000 for 
recreation programs, the same as the budget request and $3,000 
above the enacted level.
    Natural programs.--The Committee recommends $10,948,000 for 
natural programs, the same as the budget request and $18,000 
above the enacted level.
    Cultural programs.--The Committee recommends $21,298,000 
for cultural programs, an increase of $1,550,000 above the 
request and $529,000 above the enacted level. The Committee has 
retained the $300,000 for Heritage Preservation Inc, and the 
$250,000 to continue the Louisiana Heritage Education Model at 
the National Center for Preservation Technology Training 
located in Natchitoches, Louisiana. In addition, the Committee 
has provided $1,000,000 for National Register programs.
    International park affairs.--The Committee recommends 
$1,719,000 for international park affairs, the same as the 
budget request and $1,000 above the enacted level.
    Environmental and compliance review.--The Committee 
recommends $400,000 for environmental and compliance review, 
the same as the budget request and $3,000 above the enacted 
level.
    Grant Administration.--The Committee recommends $1,585,000 
for grant administration, the same as the budget request and 
$3,000 above the enacted level.
    Heritage Partnership Programs.--The Committee recommends 
$14,889,000 for heritage partnership programs, $7,154,000 above 
the request and $1,680,000 above the enacted level. This total 
includes $14,770,000 for individual heritage areas and $119,000 
for administration. The Committee recommends the following 
distribution of funds for each heritage area:
        Project                                                   Amount
America's Agricultural Heritage Partnership (Silos and 
    Smokestacks)........................................        $700,000
Augusta Canal National Heritage Area....................         600,000
Automobile National Heritage Area.......................         700,000
Cache La Poudre River Corridor..........................          50,000
Cane River National Heritage Area.......................         800,000
Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor..........         900,000
Erie Canalway National Corridor.........................         600,000
Essex National Heritage Area............................       1,000,000
Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area..............       1,000,000
Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor..         600,000
John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage 
    Center..............................................         800,000
Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area................         600,000
National Coal Heritage..................................         210,000
Ohio and Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor..........       1,000,000
Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage 
    Center..............................................         800,000
Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area..................       1,000,000
Schuykill River Valley National Heritage Area...........         500,000
Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic 
    District............................................         500,000
South Carolina National Heritage Corridor...............       1,000,000
Tennessee Civil War Heritage Area.......................         210,000
Wheeling National Heritage Area.........................         800,000
Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area....................         400,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Project total.....................................     $14,770,000

    Statutory or contractual aid.--The Committee recommends 
$4,939,000 for statutory or contractual aid, an increase of 
$802,000 above the budget request and a reduction of 
$12,066,000 below the enacted level.

                     URBAN PARK AND RECREATION FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................           300,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        30,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        29,700,000


    The Committee has included $30,000,000 for the Urban Park 
and Recreation Fund, an increase of $29,700,000 above the 
request and the same as the enacted level. This program is 
funded under the conservation spending category.

                       HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND

    The Historic Preservation Fund supports the State historic 
preservation offices to perform a variety of functions, 
including: State management and administration of existing 
grant obligations, review and advice on Federal projects and 
actions, determinations, and nominations to the National 
Register, Tax Act certifications, and technical preservation 
services. The States also review properties within States to 
develop data for planning use.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $74,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        67,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        76,500,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +2,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +9,500,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $76,500,000 for historic 
preservation, an increase of $9,500,000 above the budget 
request and $2,000,000 above the enacted level.
    The total amount provides $40,000,000 for the State 
historic preservation offices, $4,000,000 for tribal grants, 
$30,000,000 for the Save America's Treasures program and 
$2,500,000 for a grant to the National Trust for Historic 
Preservation to assist in the perpetual care and maintenance of 
historic sites of the National Trust. The Committee intends 
that the grant funds will be made available under the following 
terms and conditions.
    1. The full amount granted to the National Trust is to be 
deposited into a permanently restricted Historic Sites Fund 
account in the same manner as other National Trust endowment 
funds. Any income attributable to the grant will be added to 
the Historic Sites Fund endowment account, and will be made 
available for authorized grant purposes.
    2. The National Trust will make distributions from the 
amounts deposited in the endowment fund account for the care 
and maintenance of National Trust Historic Sites, in amounts 
consistent with its regularly established spending rate.
    3. In accordance with established National Trust policy, 
distributions from the National Trust Historic Sites Fund 
account will be matched as expended, dollar for dollar, with 
non-Federal funds raised for the care and maintenance of 
National Trust Historic Sites. Consequently, no further match 
requirement will be required for the grant. Work carried out by 
the National Trust under the grant will be in conformance with 
the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of 
Historic Places.
    4. The National Trust will maintain adequate records and 
accounts relating to all financial transactions of, and 
distributions from, the National Historic Sites endowment 
account, and will make such records available for audit and 
inspection by the National Park Service and the Comptroller 
General for a period of five years following the date of the 
grant.
    The Committee has accepted the Administration's bill 
language change regarding eligibility of projects under the 
Save America's Treasures program.
    The Historic Preservation Fund is funded under the 
conservation spending category.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $387,668,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       322,384,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       325,186,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       -62,482,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +2,802,000


    The Committee recommends $335,186,000 for construction, an 
increase of $12,802,000 above the budget request and 
$52,482,000 below the enacted level.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:
        Project                                                   Amount
Acadia NP, ME (rehabilitation)..........................      $3,351,000
Acadia NP, ME (utilities upgrade).......................       5,171,000
Alice Ferguson Foundation, MD (rehabilitation)..........         400,000
Apostle Islands NL, WI (lighthouse).....................       1,600,000
Apostle Islands NL, WI (utility system).................       1,030,000
Badlands NP, SD.........................................       3,842,000
Bent's Old Fort NHS, CO.................................       1,325,000
Big Bend NP, TX (Chisos Basin Campground)...............         464,000
Big Bend NP, TX (rehabilitation)........................         246,000
Big Bend NP, TX (sprinkler system)......................         673,000
Big Cypress National Preserve, FL.......................       2,000,000
Big South Fork National River & Rec Area, KY/TN (upgrade 
    exhibits)...........................................         400,000
Blue Ridge Parkway, NC..................................       1,624,000
Canaveral NS, FL........................................       1,600,000
Cape Cod NS, MA (Highland's Center).....................       1,725,000
Cane & Karst, NM........................................       2,000,000
Colonial NHP, VA........................................       4,221,000
Craters of the Moon NM, ID..............................       1,283,000
Cumberland Gap NHP, KY..................................       5,583,000
Cumberland Island NS, GA (St. Mary's)...................       2,720,000
Cumberland Island NS, GA (Plum Orchard).................         442,000
Cuyahoga NP, OH.........................................       3,000,000
Death Valley NP, CA (rehabilitation)....................       2,007,000
Death Valley NP, CA (Scotty's Castle)...................         547,000
Denali NP, AK...........................................       3,171,000
Eleanor Roosevelt NHS, NY...............................         300,000
Everglades NP, FL (waste treatment).....................       4,594,000
Everglades NP, FL (water system)........................      13,295,000
Fort Stanwix NM, NY.....................................       3,239,000
Fredericksburg & Spotsylvania NMP, VA...................       2,250,000
Gateway NRA, NY.........................................       3,299,000
General Grant NM, NY....................................       1,840,000
George Washington Carver NM, MO.........................         300,000
George Washington Memorial Parkway, VA (Arlington 
    Boathouse, EA)......................................         600,000
George Washington Memorial Parkway, VA (Arlington House)         616,000
George Washington Memorial Parkway, VA (complete EA, Mt. 
    Vernon Trail).......................................         250,000
George Washington Memorial Parkway/Mt. Vernon Trail, VA.         200,000
Gettysburg NMP, PA (conservation work)..................       2,500,000
Glacier NP, MT..........................................       1,500,000
Golden Gate NRA, CA (Alcatraz barracks).................       1,210,000
Golden Gate NRA, CA (building 640)......................         600,000
Golden Gate NRA, CA (Cliff House).......................       1,914,000
Great Sand Dunes, CO....................................       4,424,000
Homestead NHS, NE.......................................         300,000
Independence NHP, PA....................................       4,923,000
Indiana Dunes NHP, IN...................................       2,389,000
Jean Lafitte NHP, LA (Chalmette failing drainage & 
    Barataria exhibits).................................         500,000
John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley NHA..............       1,000,000
Lincoln Library, IL.....................................      10,000,000
Mammoth Cave NP, KY.....................................         555,000
Manassas NBP, VA........................................       1,493,000
Mississippi National River & Recreation Area, MN (St. 
    Anthony Center exhibits)............................       1,000,000
Mississippi National River & Recreation Area, MN (Twin 
    Cities).............................................         750,000
Morristown NHS, NJ......................................       3,200,000
Mt. Rainier NP, WA......................................       4,400,000
Mt. Rainier NP, WA (Guide House)........................         244,000
Mt. Rainier NP, WA (rehabilitate electrical system).....       2,701,000
National Capital Parks-Central, DC (Lincoln Memorial 
    preservation).......................................       5,192,000
National Capital Parks-Central, DC (Lincoln Memorial 
    security)...........................................       6,183,000
National Underground Railroad Freedom Center, OH........       6,100,000
Olympic NP, WA..........................................      21,781,000
Oregon Caves NM, OR.....................................       1,044,000
Rocky Mountain NP, CO...................................       2,335,000
Saratoga NHP, NY (exhibits).............................         300,000
Stones River NB, TN (trails)............................         500,000
SW Pennsylvania Heritage Commission, PA.................       3,000,000
Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve, KS.................       2,891,000
Tuskegee Airmen NHS, AL (oral histories)................         500,000
Ulysses S. Grant NHS, MO................................       1,994,000
USS Arizona Memorial, HI................................       1,157,000
Washita NB, OK..........................................       3,500,000
White House, DC.........................................       9,582,000
Wind Cave NP, SD........................................       2,172,000
Yellowstone NP, WY (Old Faithful Inn)...................       5,743,000
Yellowstone NP, WY (rehabilitation).....................       6,396,000
Yellowstone NP, WY (upgrade fire protection)............         757,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Project total.....................................     207,938,000
Emergency/unscheduled...................................       3,500,000
Housing replacement.....................................      12,500,000
Dam safety..............................................       2,700,000
Equipment replacement...................................      31,960,000
Construction planning...................................      25,400,000
Construction Program Management.........................      27,292,000
General Management Plans................................      13,896,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Construction................................     325,186,000

    The Committee has included an additional $10,000,000, as 
proposed in the budget request, to enhance the capacity of the 
Service to execute the capital infrastructure programs that 
contribute to reducing the deferred maintenance backlog. 
Significant funding increases have been provided by this 
Committee over the last six years, in line item construction, 
repair and rehabilitation, and the fee demonstration program. 
The Committee realizes that additional capacity is needed in 
the Service to keep these projects moving towards completion, 
including project specifications, compliance, and contract 
award and modification.
    The Service should note that the Committee approved a 
$3,500,000 reprogramming request in fiscal year 1999 and 
provided additional funds and flexibility in the construction 
account over the past several years to respond to the 
additional workload. Given that support provided and 
considering the budget constraints facing this bill, the 
Service is expected to resolve its problems with unobligated 
balances. The Service should not ask for additional funds in 
the near future for this purpose.
    In addition, the Committee directs that the regions not use 
these funds exclusively to hire permanent staff. As much as 
possible, the funds are to be used to hire contractual 
assistance. The Committee expects to be informed before any new 
staff is hired using these funds. None of the funds provided 
are to be used for planners, as the Committee is concerned that 
additional planners tend to result in more new projects, rather 
than progress towards reducing the backlog of maintenance.
    None of the funds are to be used to conduct construction 
supervision in-house, consistent with the program guidelines 
used for the Denver Service Center. In-house design is also 
subject to the same program guidelines as the Denver Service 
Center. Staff, whether federal or contract, funded with these 
monies are to be used exclusively in the park construction 
program.
    None of these funds are to be allocated until the Service 
presents the Committee with a plan detailing how the funds will 
be used and allocated. The plan must address how the Service 
will address fluctuating workloads associated with project 
work. The Committee does not intend that any of these funds be 
used to pay expenses associated with existing staff--all of 
these dollars are intended to enhance and expand capacity 
beyond existing levels. The Committee expects a plan each 
fiscal year on how these funds are to be allocated. Any change 
to these annual plans must be approved by the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriation.
    The Service is directed to itemize by park and project how 
construction planning dollars will be allocated in the annual 
budget justifications. The Committee expects a report by 
December 1, 2002, providing this information for fiscal year 
2003. While the Committee will consider a modest contingency 
allocation for unexpected planning needs, the majority of the 
funds are to be associated with specific projects. The 
Committee should be notified about any major change in the 
scope of a project.
    Bill language has been included under this account which 
limits the Denver Service Center staff, funded by the 
Construction Program Management and Operations Activity, to 160 
full time equivalent employees including all full time and part 
time personnel and employees detailed to the Center or working 
on Center related projects. This is consistent with the 
National Academy of Public Administration report. The Committee 
understands that the Service Center is under that capacity at 
this time.
    Bill language is also included, which permits the transfer 
of $2,000,000 to the City of Carlsbad, New Mexico for the 
construction of the National Cave and Karst Research Institute 
to be operated and constructed in accordance with the 
provisions in Public Law 105-325. The Committee understands 
that the Service enthusiastically supports the construction of 
this cost shared center, which will fulfill an important 
scientific research need.
    Bill language is also included, which requires Committee 
approval of spending for any new large facility including 
visitor centers, educational or interpretive centers, 
curatorial or administrative facilities with a total cost in 
excess of $5,000,000. This provision also applies to 
partnership and fee demonstration projects.
    The Committee has provided $400,000 to be matched with non-
federal funds for the Alice Ferguson Foundation for backlog 
maintenance needs; $1,600,000 to complete lighthouse repairs at 
Apostle Islands NL and $464,000 in planning funds to 
rehabilitate the Chisos Basin Campgrounds at Big Bend NP. In 
addition, $400,000 in planning funds is provided to upgrade 
exhibits at Big South Fork National River and Recreation Area 
in Kentucky.
    Also provided is $1,600,000 to complete the rehabilitation 
of two historic structures at Canaveral NS; $2,000,000 for the 
construction of the Cave and Karst Center; $1,725,000 which 
completes the federal share of the Highlands Center at Cape Cod 
NS; $2,270,000 to complete the St. Mary's Center at Cumberland 
Island NS and $442,000 for continuing restoration at the 
historic Plum Orchard.
    The Committee has included $3,000,000 for rehabilitation 
work at Cuyahoga National Park; $547,000 in planning funds for 
Scotty's Castle at Death Valley NP; $300,000 in planning funds 
for improvements to the historic structural and cultural 
landscapes at Eleanor Roosevelt National Historic Site. None of 
these funds are to be used to plan for, construct, or improve 
facilities used by park partners. Such improvements should be 
funded by non-federal sources.
    Planning funds in the amount of $300,000 each are provided 
to both the George Washington Carver NM and Homestead NHS. 
These funds may not be expended until the Service presents a 
more detailed plan to the Committee on how these funds will be 
spent. The following funds are provided to the George 
Washington Memorial Parkway--$600,000 to complete the 
environmental assessment associated with the Arlington 
boathouse proposal, $250,000 to complete assessments for the Mt 
Vernon Trail, and $200,000 for improvements to the parkway.
    Also included is $2,500,000 to complete conservation work 
at Gettysburg NMP. In addition, $600,000 is to complete 
construction planning, including design documents and 
construction drawings, for the proposed museum of Japanese-
American history at Presidio Building 640. In accordance with 
this public/private partnership, this completes the Federal 
contribution. All funding for actual construction of this 
facility is to be raised through non-federal sources.
    The Committee has included $500,000 for failing drainage 
problems at Chalmette Battlefield and for exhibits at the 
Barataria unit, both located within the Jean Lafitte NHP in 
Louisiana; $1,000,000 for the John H. Chafee Blackstone River 
Valley NHA and $10,000,000 for the Lincoln Library. Also 
included is $1,000,000 for exhibits at St. Anthony's Center, 
which is part of the Mississippi National River & Recreation 
Area in Minnesota.
    The Committee has included $750,000 in the planning portion 
of the Service's construction budget for the National Park 
Service to lead a public planning process associated with 
disposition of the former Twin Cities Bureau of Mines Research 
Center. After lengthy discussions with the Department of the 
Interior, the Metropolitan Airports' Commission decided against 
acquiring the Center. The Committee is informed that the 
Department of the Interior has concluded that reuse of the 
Center as an office complex for its bureaus and offices is not 
economically viable. The Committee agrees with this conclusion 
and with the decision of the Department to examine other 
options, including returning the site to natural conditions.
    The Committee understands that while the responsibility for 
the site rests with the Secretary of the Interior, the National 
Park Service participated extensively and effectively in prior 
public efforts to determine the potential future uses of the 
site. The funds provided will allow the Park Service to oversee 
the necessary studies and reviews associated with the potential 
disposal of Federal property. The Service should use the funds 
provided to obtain the necessary assistance for the studies and 
reviews, including contracting for services as appropriate.
    Other Department of the Interior bureaus, including the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, should provide such assistance 
as is necessary to facilitate the Service's accomplishment of 
this work. The Committee does not intend for the Service's 
oversight of this process to disrupt or interfere with the 
ongoing operations at the Mississippi National River and 
Recreation Area (MNRRA), and thus provides the resources 
necessary to accomplish this workload.
    While the Park Service is being asked to coordinate the 
process, it is imperative that other public interests, 
including the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and local and 
state governments participate in the public review and comment 
periods. By requesting Park Service to lead this process, it is 
not the Committee's intention that the site be transferred to 
the MNRRA. The Committee understands that this option is 
inconsistent with MNRRA's comprehensive management plan.
    The Committee has provided $3,200,000 to complete the 
federal share of rehabilitation work at Morristown NHS. Also 
included is $6,100,000 for the National Underground Railroad 
Freedom Center in Ohio. This completes the federal share of 
this project.
    The Committee also recommends $300,000 for exhibits at 
Saratoga NHP in New York; $500,000 for Stones River NB to plan 
for a tour route and pedestrian trail; $3,000,000 to continue 
work at the SW Pennsylvania Heritage Commission in 
Pennsylvania; and $500,000 to continue oral histories of the 
Tuskegee Airmen.
    The Committee has included $3,500,000 for the Washita 
National Battlefield. This completes the federal share of this 
project. This facility will also house the Black Kettle 
National Grassland office, a unit of the Forest Service. An 
additional $750,000 for the Forest Service portion of this 
project is included in the Forest Service capital improvement 
and maintenance account. The Committee expects the Park Service 
to make appropriate and suitable space available to the Forest 
Service to enable it to provide information, including 
historical and current program orientation. The Forest Service 
should not be required to pay more than $20,000 per year for 
routine maintenance and basic utilities, an amount slightly 
higher than its current expenses.
    The Committee expects that interagency collaboration on 
facilities, as well as cultural and natural resource protection 
and use, will result in greater long-term efficiency and better 
service to the public. To facilitate this collaboration, all 
future personnel placements by either agency at these sites 
should be considered for maximum interagency staffing 
opportunities.
    Within the amount provided for equipment replacement, 
$350,000 is earmarked for two replacement vessels at Apostle 
Island NL in Wisconsin.
    Of the total amount provided for construction, $53,736,000 
is funded under the conservation spending category.

                    LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND

                              (RESCISSION)




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      -$30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       -30,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       -30,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends the rescission of $30,000,000 in 
the annual contract authority provided by the 16 U.S.C. 4601-
10a. This authority has not been used in years, and there are 
no plans to use it in fiscal year 2003.

                 LAND ACQUISITION AND STATE ASSISTANCE




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $274,117,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       286,057,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       253,099,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       -21,018,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       -32,958,000


    The Committee recommends $253,099,000 for land acquisition 
and State assistance, a decrease of $32,958,000 below the 
budget request and $21,018,000 below the enacted level. This 
amount includes $79,099,000 for line item projects, $12,000,000 
for acquisition management, $4,000,000 for emergencies and 
hardships and $4,000,000 for inholdings. Also included is 
$154,000,000 for the stateside program including $4,000,000 for 
administration. The Committee has retained the current 
allocation formula for stateside grants.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:
                                                               Committee
        Area and State                                    recommendation
Big Thicket Preserve (TX)...............................      $3,000,000
Blue Ridge Parkway (NC/VA)..............................         399,000
Chickamauga/Chattanooga NMP (TN)........................       1,030,000
Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area (NJ/PA).....       5,000,000
Ebey's Landing National Historical Reserve (WA).........       1,100,000
Fredricksburg and Spotsylvania County Battlefields 
    Memorial (VA).......................................       1,100,000
Golden Gate NRA (Picardo Ranch) (CA)....................       2,500,000
Great Sand Dunes National Monument and Preserve (CO)....       7,000,000
Gulf Islands National Seashore (MS).....................       4,000,000
Hawai'i Volcanoes National Park (HI)....................       5,000,000
Ice Age Trail (WI)......................................       3,000,000
Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore (IN)...................       1,000,000
Lake Mead National Recreation Area (NV).................       3,500,000
Little Rock Central High School National Historic Site 
    (AR)................................................         130,000
Moccasin Bend National Park (TN)........................       1,300,000
Obed National Wild and Scenic River (TN)................       1,500,000
Pinnacles National Monument (CA)........................       1,000,000
Piscataway Park (MD)....................................         500,000
Point Reyes National Seashore (CA)......................       1,500,000
Prince William Forest Park (VA).........................         700,000
Richmond National Battlefield Park (VA).................       2,000,000
Saguaro National Park (AZ)..............................       2,320,000
Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area (CA)....       2,500,000
Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Nat'l Historic District 
    (VA)................................................       2,000,000
Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (MI).............       1,000,000
South Florida Restoration (grant to State of Florida)...      19,500,000
Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve (FL)..........       1,320,000
Valley Forge National Historical Park (PA)..............       2,000,000
Virgin Islands National Park--Salt River (VI)...........       1,500,000
Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve (AK)......         700,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal: Federal Acquisition projects............      79,099,000
Acquisition Management..................................      12,000,000
Emergencies/Hardships...................................       4,000,000
Inholdings/Exchanges....................................       4,000,000
Stateside Grants........................................     150,000,000
Stateside Administration................................       4,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................     253,099,000
    Funds provided for Santa Monica Mountains National 
Recreation Area should be matched with non-Federal monies. This 
means new land or new dollars dedicated to protection of park 
lands within the recreation area's boundaries. By June 30th of 
each year, the Service should certify the level of non-Federal 
contributions to land acquisition at this site. The Service is 
encouraged to review non-Federal appraisals in certifying the 
non-Federal contribution.
    Bill language is included under this account directing the 
expeditious completion of a flood protection system for the 8.5 
Square Mile Area component of the Modified Water Deliveries 
Project. This project is critical to restoring more natural 
water flows to Everglades National Park and future restoration 
efforts recently authorized by Congress. The language makes 
clear that Congress intends the Army Corps of Engineers, in 
cooperation with the Department of the Interior, to implement a 
flood protection system known as ``alternative 6D'' which 
combines both land acquisition within the 8.5 Square Mile Area 
and construction of an interior levee and seepage canal to 
provide the necessary flood protection to the 8.5 Square Mile 
Area.
    The land acquisition program is funded under the 
conservation spending category.

                       Administrative Provisions

    Bill language is provided that will allow the Park Service 
to collect and accumulate funds collected from concessionaire 
and other private entities for utility services to be used to 
make repairs to utility systems. Current authority does not 
allow the accumulation of funds beyond the fiscal year in which 
they are collected.
    In addition, bill language is provided that will allow the 
Park Service to benefit from partnership projects involving 
State, local or tribal governments. The Service is currently 
precluded from entering into reimbursable agreements with State 
and local governments without receiving the funds in advance of 
the work being performed.

                    United States Geological Survey

    The United States Geological Survey was established by an 
act of Congress on March 3, 1879 to provide a permanent Federal 
agency to conduct the systematic and scientific 
``classification of the public lands, and examination of the 
geological structure, mineral resources, and products of the 
National domain''. The USGS is the Federal Government's largest 
earth-science research agency, the Nation's largest civilian 
mapmaking agency, and the primary source of data on the 
Nation's surface and ground water resources. Its activities 
include conducting detailed assessments of the energy and 
mineral potential of the Nation's land and offshore areas; 
investigating and issuing warnings of earthquakes, volcanic 
eruptions, landslides, and other geologic and hydrologic 
hazards; research on the geologic structure of the Nation; 
studies of the geologic features, structure, processes, and 
history of other planets of our solar system; topographic 
surveys of the Nation and preparation of topographic and 
thematic maps and related cartographic products; development 
and production of digital cartographic data bases and products; 
collection on a routine basis of data on the quantity, quality, 
and use of surface and ground water; research in hydraulics and 
hydrology; the coordination of all Federal water data 
acquisition; the scientific understanding and technologies 
needed to support the sound management and conservation of our 
Nation's biological resources; and the application of remotely 
sensed data to the development of new cartographic, geologic, 
and hydrologic research techniques for natural resources 
planning and management.

                 SURVEYS, INVESTIGATIONS, AND RESEARCH




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $914,002,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       867,338,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       928,405,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +14,403,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +61,067,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $928,405,000 for surveys, 
investigations, and research, an increase of $61,067,000 above 
the budget request and $14,403,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
enacted level.
    For the third year in a row the Committee has restored a 
number of high-priority research programs that were proposed 
for reduction or elimination by the Office of Management and 
Budget during the budget process. Officials at the Office of 
Management and Budget seemingly believe that the Department of 
the Interior no longer needs science on which to base natural 
resource policy decisions. This is not the position of the 
Congress as articulated in previous Interior bills, nor is it 
the position of the National Academy of Sciences which has 
provided recommendations on a program by program basis 
detailing the need to expand not eliminate the very programs 
that the Office of Management and Budget has targeted as 
unnecessary. The Committee strongly urges the Department and 
OMB to continue to fund these critical science programs in the 
base budget in future years.
    National mapping program.--The Committee recommends 
$135,077,000 for the national mapping program, $5,783,000 above 
the budget request and $1,800,000 above the 2002 enacted level 
including increases above the 2002 level of $900,000 for fixed 
costs, and $1,000,000 for energy assessments, and a decrease of 
$100,000 for travel. The America View program is maintained at 
the enacted level of $3,000,000.
    The Committee understands that the U.S. Geological Survey 
has embarked on a decade-long effort to establish a digital 
database known as the National Map, which will update existing 
geographical infrastructure information. This project will 
replace over 55,000 existing paper topographical maps that are, 
on average, 23 years old. These maps, which cover both the 
natural and the built environment and the associated digital 
data, represent our most extensive geographic data 
infrastructure. This critical asset is becoming increasingly 
outdated as the demand for this capability is growing. January 
2001 marked the beginning of a major USGS effort to transform 
the current paper series into a seamless, integrated, and on-
line database known as the National Map. This strategic project 
requires extensive partnerships with State and local 
governments, other Federal agencies, non-governmental 
organizations, universities, and the private sector. The 
Committee understands that these alliances are being forged to 
construct the National Map. While portions of this digital 
infrastructure will be provided through these partnerships 
based on common standards and definitions, the vast majority of 
these spatial data will need to be provided by the Survey and 
other Federal agencies.
    Digital spatial data are essential to almost all sectors of 
the national economy. The private sector needs current and 
accurate digital geographic data, which will be provided by the 
National Map Program. Examples include: 1) road and highway 
data used for fleet vehicle routing by trucking companies, home 
delivery by retailers, and location-based services by 
restaurants; 2) digital elevation data for cellular telephone 
tower siting, airline and general aviation flight path 
planning, brush and forest fire spread modeling for insurance 
companies; 3) topographic data for private utility power line 
and pipeline maintenance, planning and routing; and 4) detailed 
map data for mining and energy exploration and extraction.
    The benefits of updated digital geographic data for use in 
geographic information systems and the projected cost savings 
merit this project being a high priority within the Department. 
The United Kingdom realized great savings from investments in 
modernized digital mapping infrastructure. The return on 
investment from improvements in access to, and use of, digital 
geographic data were in the neighborhood of $10 to $15 for 
every dollar invested. This capability can also function as a 
baseline for homeland security efforts as we seek to protect 
our critical infrastructure. The development of these digital 
products will improve performance, lower costs, and reduce the 
redundancy of geographic development by different agencies and 
levels of government. It will vastly improve citizen access to 
current geographic information and will finally unleash the 
integrating power of digital maps and information systems. The 
Committee strongly encourages the Administration to make 
completing and maintaining the National Map a high priority.
    Geologic hazards, resources and processes.--The Committee 
recommends $234,692,000 for geologic hazards, resources, and 
processes, $10,036,000 above the budget request and $1,882,000 
above the 2002 level, including increases above the 2002 level 
of $1,930,000 for fixed costs, $2,000,000 for the coastal 
program, $500,000 for a scientific study into the impact of 
global dust events impacting the continental U.S., $1,200,000 
for energy assessments, and $500,000 for geothermal 
assessments, and decreases of $324,000 for travel, $1,000,000 
for monitoring equipment at Shemya Alaska, $450,000 for the 
Lake Mojave study, $500,000 for the North Carolina coastal 
erosion study, $1,500,000 for the Alaska minerals project, and 
$474,000 for the Yukon Flats study.
    Last year the Committee provided additional funding to 
begin the process of expanding the Survey's coastal program 
consistent with the National Academy of Sciences 
recommendations for a comprehensive national program. The 
Committee has provided an additional $2,000,000, which will 
focus on moving the work in Tampa Bay from the pilot study 
phase to a fully operational project as part of the National 
coastal program.
    The Committee has maintained funding for light distancing 
and ranging (LIDAR) technology at the 2002 level to assist with 
the listing of Chinook Salmon and Summer Chum Salmon under the 
Endangered Species Act.
    The Committee has continued the Survey's current programs 
that address water quality, land subsidence, and sea-level rise 
in coastal Louisiana.
    Water resources investigations.--The Committee recommends 
$209,678,000 for water resources investigations, $31,850,000 
above the budget request and $3,852,000 above the 2002 enacted 
level, including increases above the 2002 level of $1,913,000 
for fixed costs, $1,000,000 for the US/Mexican border 
initiative, $1,000,000 for the Lake Pontchartrain study, 
$500,000 for the Potomac River basin ground water study, 
$580,000 for the long-term Estuary Assessment, and $400,000 for 
the Water Resources Research Institutes, and decreases of 
$348,000 for travel, $200,000 for the Berkley Pit, $299,000 for 
the Lake Champlain study, $499,000 for Hawaii ground water, and 
$195,000 for Noyes Slough.
    The Committee has provided an additional $1,000,000 to 
begin the process of developing a baseline water quality 
assessment of Lake Pontchartrain's drainage basin. This study 
should be a collaborative effort with Southeastern Louisiana 
University.
    The Committee has provided an additional $580,000 for the 
Long-Term Estuary Assessment Group for a total program level of 
$1,000,000. These funds were provided so that the Survey can 
continue to participate in the university based consortium, 
called the Long-Term Estuary Assessment Group, for the purpose 
of developing assessment and monitoring systems relating to the 
Mississippi River.
    The Committee has provided an additional $500,000 to work 
with the Interstate Commission for the Potomac River Basin in 
developing a basin-wide groundwater assessment.
    Biological research.--The Committee recommends $170,414,000 
for biological research, $9,933,000 above the budget request 
and $4,025,000 above the 2002 enacted level including increases 
above the 2002 level of $2,704,000 for fixed costs of which 
$1,000,000 is for the cooperative research units to maintain 
the current staffing levels, $120,000 for Great Lakes vessel 
operations, $180,000 for two additional researchers at the 
Great Lakes Science Center, $1,000,000 for amphibian research, 
$500,000 for genetic research at the Wellsboro laboratory, 
$300,000 for inventorying and monitoring in the Cherokee 
National Forest, $500,000 for the NBII Tennessee node, $500,000 
for the NBII New York node, and $400,000 to establish a new 
fish and wildlife cooperative research unit at the University 
of Nebraska, and decreases of $235,000 for travel, $748,000 for 
the lead mining study in the Mark Twain National Forest, 
$180,000 for the Yukon River salmon study, $416,000 for Great 
Lakes vessel equipment, $300,000 for the pallid sturgeon study, 
$50,000 for the Tunison laboratory, and $250,000 for the 
terrapin study.
    The Committee has realigned the Gap Analysis Program by 
shifting $3,900,000 from the biological research and monitoring 
subactivity into biological information management and delivery 
subactivity. This realignment should result in management 
efficiencies for this high-priority program.
    Within the funds provided for biological research and 
monitoring, $2,700,000 is earmarked for chronic wasting disease 
research. The Committee directs the Department of the Interior 
and the Department of Agriculture, working with the appropriate 
Interior Bureaus, to provide a coordinated, detailed, and 
comprehensive budget request as part of the 2004 budget.
    Science support.--The Committee recommends $87,369,000 for 
science support, $1,265,000 above the budget request and 
$1,114,000 above the 2002 enacted level, including an increase 
above the 2002 level of $1,217,000 for fixed costs and a 
decrease of $103,000 for travel.
    Facilities.--The Committee recommends $91,175,000 for 
facilities $2,200,000 above the budget request and $1,730,000 
above the 2002 enacted level including increases above the 2002 
level of $3,979,000 for fixed costs, $1,200,000 for the Center 
for Coastal and Regional Studies in Florida for the purchase of 
scientific equipment, and $1,000,000 for the Tunison 
laboratory, and decreases of $1,700,000 for the Leetown 
expansion, $2,250,000 for one time construction funds for the 
Center for Coastal and Regional Studies in Florida, and 
$499,000 for the Wellsboro laboratory.
    Bill Language.--Language has been included under the 
Survey's administrative provisions to allow the Survey to use 
cooperative agreements for research and data collection, and to 
allow the Survey to obtain space in cooperator facilities.
    The Committee has provided an additional $1,000,000 for the 
Tunison laboratory. These funds will be used to modernize this 
facility and to move forward with plans to use this facility to 
help in the effort to restore Atlantic salmon in Lake Ontario.
    The additional $1,200,000 provided to the Center for 
Coastal and Regional Studies will be applied to the costs 
associated with the Center's expansion including the outfitting 
of specialized laboratories needed to support emerging 
geochemical, microbiological, and coral reef research.

                      Minerals Management Service

    The Minerals Management Service is responsible for 
collecting, distributing, accounting and auditing revenues from 
mineral leases on Federal and Indian lands. In fiscal year 
2003, MMS expects to collect and distribute about $4.2 billion 
from more than 78,000 active Federal and Indian leases.
    The MMS also manages the offshore energy and mineral 
resources on the Nation's Outer Continental Shelf. To date, the 
OCS program has been focused primarily on oil and gas leasing. 
Over the past several years, MMS has been exploring the 
possible development of other marine mineral resources, 
especially sand and gravel.
    With the passage of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, MMS 
assumed increased responsibility for oil spill research, 
including the promotion of increased oil spill response 
capabilities, and for oil spill financial responsibility 
certifications of offshore platforms and pipelines.

                ROYALTY AND OFFSHORE MINERALS MANAGEMENT




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $150,667,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       164,222,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       164,721,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +14,054,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................          +499,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $164,721,000 for royalty and 
offshore minerals management, $499,000 above the budget request 
and $14,054,000 above the 2002 enacted level. The increase to 
the budget request is for the Offshore Technology Research 
Center.
    Bill Language.--Language has been included allowing MMS to 
retain a portion of the receipts under the royalty-in-kind 
program to pay for expenses related to the filling of the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The Committee has continued the 
offshore oil and gas leasing moratorium under General 
Provisions, Department of the Interior.
    The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 
positive environmental benefits achieved by the military 
through the implementation of pulse technology as a major 
component of its battery management programs. The Committee 
believes that the Service would also benefit significantly and 
directly from the use of this technology to extend the life of 
vehicle batteries. These benefits include savings in battery 
replacement costs, reduction in overall maintenance costs for 
vehicles and ancillary equipment, and a resultant increase in 
safety for personnel. The Committee urges the Service to 
incorporate this technology in its ongoing purchase and 
maintenance programs for vehicles. The Service should report to 
the Committee by December 31, 2002, on its plans to comply with 
this direction. Beginning with the fiscal year 2004 budget 
request, the budget submission should include an accounting of 
the extent to which battery pulse technology is being employed 
and the savings expected and realized as a result of the use of 
this technology.

                           OIL SPILL RESEARCH




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $6,105,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         6,105,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         6,105,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $6,105,000 to be derived from the 
Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, to conduct oil spill research 
and financial responsibility and inspection activities 
associated with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, Public Law 101-
380. The Committee recommendation is equal to both the budget 
request and the fiscal year 2002 level.

          Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

    The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 
(OSM), through its regulation and technology account, regulates 
surface coal mining operations to ensure that the environment 
is protected during those operations and that the land is 
adequately reclaimed once mining is completed. The OSM 
accomplishes this mission by providing grants to those States 
that maintain their own regulatory and reclamation programs and 
by conducting oversight of State programs. Further, the OSM 
administers the regulatory programs in the States that do not 
have their own programs and on Federal and tribal lands.
    Through its abandoned mine land (AML) reclamation fund 
account, the OSM provides environmental restoration at 
abandoned coal mines using tonnage-based fees collected from 
current coal production operations. In their unreclaimed 
condition these abandoned sites may endanger public health and 
safety or prevent the beneficial use of land and water 
resources.

                       REGULATION AND TECHNOLOGY




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $103,075,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       105,367,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       105,367,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +2,292,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $105,367,000 for Regulation and 
technology, including the use of $275,000 in civil penalty 
collections, which is equal to the request and $2,292,000 above 
the 2002 level. The Committee rejects the proposal to increase 
the West Virginia allocation by $2,000,000 by reducing other 
primacy States by $1,000,000 and providing the entire 
$1,000,000 increase to West Virginia. The Committee notes that 
in July, 2000, West Virginia received a special Federal 
appropriation of $9,800,000 that is not yet fully expended. 
Until that time, it is unfair and inappropriate to penalize 
other States for problems in West Virginia. Accordingly, the 
Committee directs that the increase for regulatory grants be 
distributed to all States in the normal fashion recognizing 
that in recent years funding for this program has not kept up 
with inflation. The OSM has authority to make regulatory grant 
adjustments as needed.

                    ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $203,455,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       174,035,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       184,745,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       -18,710,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +10,710,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $184,745,000 for the Abandoned 
mine reclamation fund, a decrease of $18,710,000 below the 2002 
funding level and $10,710,000 above the request. The Committee 
recognizes the great amount of reclamation work that remains to 
be done and has increased funding above the request for this 
program. The Committee has continued the authority for the 
Appalachian Clean Streams Initiative at $10,000,000 and the 
emergency funding and authorities as in fiscal year 2002, and 
discontinued the special authority for Maryland. The Committee 
rejects proposals to: reduce Federal high priority projects, 
cut travel, and not fund fixed cost increases. The Committee 
encourages the OSM to work more closely with the Federal land 
managing agencies to fund and repair abandoned mine land 
problems that are risks to human safety and health, and the 
environment. Federal lands administered by the agencies funded 
in this bill have a huge backlog in this program area.

                        Bureau of Indian Affairs

    The Bureau of Indian Affairs was created in 1824; its 
mission is founded on a government-to-government relationship 
and trust responsibility that results from treaties with Native 
groups. The Bureau delivers services to over one million Native 
Americans through 12 regional offices and 83 agency offices. In 
addition, the Bureau provides education programs to Native 
Americans through the operation of 117 day schools, 54 boarding 
schools, and 14 dormitories. Lastly, the Bureau administers 
more than 45 million acres of tribally owned land, and 10 
million acres of individually owned land and over 309,000 acres 
of Federally owned land, which is held in trust status.

                      OPERATION OF INDIAN PROGRAMS




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................    $1,799,809,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................     1,837,110,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................     1,859,064,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +59,255,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +21,954,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $1,859,064,000 for the operation 
of Indian programs, an increase of $21,954,000 above the budget 
request and $59,255,000 above the 2002 enacted level. The 
Committee agrees to all internal transfers by the BIA in the 
budget request. The Committee has provided increases above the 
enacted level to continue to fund the Administration's request 
to fix the long-standing problems associated with management of 
the Indian trust funds.
    Tribal priority allocations.--The Committee recommends 
$780,654,000 for tribal priority allocations, an increase of 
$5,120,000 above the budget request and $28,498,000 above the 
fiscal year 2002 enacted level, including increases above the 
2002 level of $1,120,000 to provide base funding for six new 
tribes, $2,000,000 for the ISD fund, $4,000,000 for tribal 
courts, $2,054,000 for IIM account management, $585,000 for 
energy development on trust lands, $477,000 for natural 
resources related to energy development, $2,000,000 for 
agriculture for the development of management plans, $1,500,000 
for forestry management, $8,125,000 for trust services for 
trust reform efforts, $5,443,000 for fixed costs, and 
$1,194,000 for internal transfers.
    Other recurring programs.--The Committee recommends 
$607,196,000 for other recurring programs, $11,004,000 above 
the budget request and $20,228,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
enacted level, including increases above the 2002 level of 
$2,000,000 for ISEP formula funds, $3,000,000 for early 
childhood development, $2,000,000 for student transportation, 
$1,900,000 for facilities operations, $6,000,000 for 
administrative cost grants, $500,000 for the timber-fish-
wildlife program, $1,000,000 for Chippewa/Ottawa treaty 
fisheries, and $6,193,000 for fixed costs, and decreases of 
$480,000 for irrigation O&M, $69,000 for the sea otter program, 
$803,000 for the Bering Sea Fisherman's Association, $150,000 
for the Nez Perce Tribe, $317,000 for the upper Columbia River 
tribes, $347,000 for the Chugach Regional Resources Commission, 
and $199,000 for internal transfers.
    The Committee recommends $524,817,000 for school 
operations, $20,802,000 above the 2002 enacted level. The 
Committee does not support the school privatization initiative. 
The Committee fully supports the President's education reform 
efforts and agrees with the Department that tribes that want to 
manage their own schools should be given that opportunity. 
Limited funding in the past for basic needs such as facilities 
operations, student transportation, and administrative cost 
grants has served as a disincentive for tribes to take over the 
administration of BIA-operated schools. The Committee firmly 
believes that strengthening basic education funding and 
increasing support for administrative cost grants are the key 
incentives to improving local tribal operations of the BIA 
schools and enhancing the quality of education. Written 
testimony that the Committee received from the tribes and 
tribal organizations was overwhelmingly opposed to the proposed 
privatization initiative and pressed for a focus on expanding 
funding for existing education programs and implementing newly 
enacted education legislation. The Committee encourages the 
Department and the Bureau to consult with the tribes and to 
examine the BIA school system needs and new legislative 
requirements thoroughly in developing its 2004 budget request 
to ensure that no Indian child is left behind.
    Non recurring programs.--The Committee recommends 
$70,824,000 for non recurring programs, $3,314,000 above the 
budget request and $1,974,000 below the fiscal year 2002 
enacted level, including increases above the 2002 level of 
$650,000 for minerals and mining, $300,000 for water management 
planning and predevelopment for the Seminole tribe to address 
water quality programs as part of Everglades restoration 
efforts, $1,500,000 for real estate services, and $193,000 for 
fixed costs, and decreases of $500,000 for the Cherion 
Foundation, $500,000 for the Alaska fire program, $75,000 for 
the Washington ferry assessment, $400,000 for the tribal 
guiding program, $1,700,000 for the distance learning project, 
$25,000 for irrigation drainage, $320,000 for unresolved 
hunting and fishing rights, $350,000 for Alaska legal services, 
and $747,000 for internal transfers.
    Within the $3,000,000 provided for the ``Jobs in the 
Woods'' initiative, $400,000 should continue to be used by the 
Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission for the Wildstock 
Restoration Initiative.
    Central office operations.--The Committee recommends 
$70,035,000 for central office operation, $2,455,000 below the 
budget request and $11,929,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
enacted level, including increases above the 2002 level of 
$5,700,000 for trust services as part of the bureaus trust 
reform efforts, $5,500,000 for information technology issues as 
part of trust reform, $500,000 for the branch of 
acknowledgment, $156,000 for fixed costs, and $74,000 for 
internal transfers, and a decrease of $1,000 for general 
administration.
    Regional office operations.--The Committee recommends 
$64,223,000 for regional office operations, the same as the 
budget request and $1,544,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
enacted level, including increases above the 2002 enacted level 
of $1,000,000 for minerals and mining, $500,000 for the land 
title records office, $613,000 for fixed costs, and a decrease 
of $569,000 for internal transfers.
    Special programs and pooled overhead.--The Committee 
recommends $266,132,000 for special programs and pooled 
overhead, $4,971,000 above the budget request and $970,000 
below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level including increases 
above the 2002 level of $3,000,000 for facilities operations, 
and $1,485,000 for fixed costs, and decreases of $500,000 for 
the Indian Arts and Craft Board, $100,000 for the Ponca tribe 
economic development plan, $1,000,000 for the Yuut Elitnauviat 
learning center, $1,000,000 for the aviation training program, 
$401,000 for intra-governmental transfers, $2,000,000 for 
employee displacement costs, and $454,000 for internal 
transfers.
    Bill Language.--Language is included under administrative 
provisions allowing the Bureau to contract for management, 
operations, and maintenance services for the San Carlos 
Irrigation Project.
    The Committee is aware of concerns that the Solicitor may 
not be providing the Indian Arts and Crafts Board with adequate 
legal representation and urges the Solicitor to provide 
appropriate legal representation for the Indian Arts and Crafts 
Board in enforcement of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act.
    The Committee once again takes note of two innovative 
programs underway by the Tohono O'odham Nation in Arizona. The 
Nation has developed a higher education services program to 
assist tribal members in identifying available funding sources 
for higher education, as well as preparatory course work. The 
Nation has also developed an employment assistance program to 
assist tribal members to find employment through direct 
employment assistance and vocational training. The Committee 
strongly encourages the Bureau to review favorably these 
programs as it develops the 2004 budget.
    The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 
positive environmental benefits achieved by the military 
through the implementation of pulse technology as a major 
component of its battery management programs. The Committee 
believes that the Bureau would also benefit significantly and 
directly from the use of this technology to extend the life of 
vehicle batteries. These benefits include savings in battery 
replacement costs, reduction in overall maintenance costs for 
vehicles and ancillary equipment, and a resultant increase in 
safety for personnel. The Committee urges the Bureau to 
incorporate this technology in its ongoing purchase and 
maintenance programs for vehicles. The Bureau should report to 
the Committee by December 31, 2002, on its plans to comply with 
this direction. Beginning with the fiscal year 2004 budget 
request, the budget submission should include an accounting of 
the extent to which battery pulse technology is being employed 
and the savings expected and realized as a result of the use of 
this technology.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $357,132,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       345,252,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       345,252,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       -11,800,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $345,252,000 for construction, the 
same as the budget request and 11,880,000 below the fiscal year 
2002 enacted level.
    Education.--The Committee recommends $292,717,000 for 
education construction, the same as the budget request and 
$214,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level including 
increases above the 2002 level of $2,576,000 for facilities 
improvement and repair and $214,000 for fixed costs, and a 
decrease of $2,576,000 for replacement school construction. The 
funding level for replacement school construction is sufficient 
to construct the following six schools: Santa Fe Indian School, 
NM; Kayenta Boarding School, AZ; Tiospa Zina Tribal School, SD; 
Wide Ruins Boarding School, AZ; Low Mountain Boarding school, 
AZ; and the St. Francis Indian School, SD.
    Within the funds provided for facilities improvement and 
repair, $918,000 is for the Ramah Navajo replacement dormitory. 
This funding level is sufficient to complete construction of 
this project.
    Public safety and justice.--The Committee recommends 
$5,046,000 for public safety and justice, the same as the 
budget request and $495,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
level, including an increase above the 2002 level of $5,000 for 
fixed costs and a decrease of $500,000 for fire protection.
    Resources management.--The Committee recommends $39,173,000 
for resources management, the same as the budget request and 
$11,472,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, including 
increases above the 2002 level of $57,000 for fixed costs, and 
$701,000 for internal transfers for FERC activities, and a 
decrease of $12,230,000 for the Navajo irrigation project.
    General administration.--The Committee recommends 
$8,316,000 for general administration, the same as the budget 
request and $127,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, 
including an increase above the 2002 level of $73,000 for fixed 
costs and a decrease of $200,000 for construction program 
management.

 INDIAN LAND AND WATER CLAIM SETTLEMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS PAYMENTS TO 
                                INDIANS




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $60,949,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        57,949,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        60,949,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +3,000,000


    The Committee recommends $60,949,000 for Indian land and 
water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to Indians 
$3,000,000 above the budget request and the same as the 2002 
enacted level. Funding includes $625,000 for White Earth, 
$250,000 for Hoopa-Yurok, $24,728,000 for the Ute settlement, 
$142,000 for Pyramid Lake, $5,068,000 for Rocky Boys, 
$19,000,000 for the Schiviwtz Band of which $3,000,000 for land 
acquisition is funded under this account rather than the 
departmental management as proposed in the budget request, 
$3,136,000 for Santo Domingo Pueblo, and $8,000,000 for 
Colorado Ute.

                 INDIAN GUARANTEED LOAN PROGRAM ACCOUNT




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $4,986,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         5,493,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         5,493,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................          +507,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $5,493,000 for the Indian 
guaranteed loan program account the same as the budget request 
and $507,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

                          Departmental Offices


                            Insular Affairs


                       ASSISTANCE TO TERRITORIES

    The Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) was established on 
August 4, 1995 through Secretarial Order No. 3191, which also 
abolished the former Office of Territorial and International 
Affairs. The OIA has important responsibilities to help the 
United States government fulfill its responsibilities to the 
four U.S. territories of Guam, American Samoa, U.S. Virgin 
Islands and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands 
(CNMI) and also the three freely associated States: the 
Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Republic of the 
Marshall Islands (RMI) and the Republic of Palau. The permanent 
and trust fund payments to the territories and the compact 
nations provide substantial financial resources to these 
governments.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $78,950,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        70,217,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        73,217,000
Comparison:
Appropriation, 2002...................................        -5,733,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        +3,000,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $73,217,000 for assistance to 
territories, $5,733,000 below the fiscal year 2002 level and 
$3,000,000 above the budget request.
    Territorial Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$22,397,000 for territorial assistance, $5,733,000 below the 
fiscal year 2002 level and $3,000,000 above the budget request. 
Increases to the budget request include $1,000,000 for court-
mandated improvement projects in the U.S. Virgin Islands, 
$1,000,000 for compact impact aid to Guam, and $1,000,000 for 
the Prior Service Benefits Administration. Further instructions 
on this latter matter are under the Covenant grant heading 
below.
    The Committee approves the proposed staffing increase to 
administer the new Compact financial assistance program which, 
hopefully, will soon be established for the Federated States of 
Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands. The 
Committee encourages the Administration to consider 
establishing an interagency group on Insular affairs in order 
to more effectively coordinate the various efforts in 
government. The Committee encourages the Department to work 
diligently with the Marine Resources Pacific Consortium, 
coordinated by the University of Guam, to enhance management 
and preservation of coral reefs among the Pacific Islands of 
the CNMI, Guam, American Samoa, the Federated States of 
Micronesia, the Republic of Palau, and the Republic of the 
Marshall Islands.
    American Samoa.--The Committee recommends $23,100,000 for 
American Samoa as requested and enacted for 2002. The Committee 
continues to be concerned about fiscal conditions in American 
Samoa and encourages the Administration and the American Samoa 
government to complete and implement a financial reform package 
forthwith.
    Northern Mariana Islands/Covenant grants.--The Committee 
recommends $27,720,000 for CNMI covenant grants as requested 
and enacted in 2002. The Committee approves the proposed 
increase to CNMI impact aid and the reduction to the CNMI labor 
initiative now that other Federal agencies absorb the cost of 
their CNMI operations into their operating budgets. The 
Committee notes that the statutory earmark for CNMI 
construction for fiscal year 2003 is $5,420,000. The Committee 
directs that $10,000,000 be allocated for CNMI construction 
grants, a $1,000,000 reduction from the budget request but an 
increase of $4,580,000 above the current statutory requirement. 
The Committee has included language authorizing $1,000,000 of 
Covenant grant funding to be used to continue payment of 
benefits under the prior service benefits program. In addition, 
the Committee has provided an additional $1,000,000 for the 
prior benefits program under the technical assistance program. 
The Department is directed to meet with representatives of the 
Prior Service Benefits Board of Directors to develop a proposal 
for future funding at a reduced level and to arrange for 
transfer of program administration to appropriate pension or 
social security systems in the freely associated states and the 
CNMI.
    Guam.--The Committee notes the $4,580,000 payment to Guam 
using Covenant grant funds and an additional $1,000,000 in 
technical assistance funding are to address the impact 
resulting from the implementation of the Compact of Free 
Association.

                      COMPACT OF FREE ASSOCIATION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $23,245,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        20,745,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        21,045,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        -2,200,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................          +300,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $21,045,000 for the compact of 
free association, $300,000 above the request and $2,200,000 
below the 2002 level. The Committee notes that this reduction 
is mandated in law now that the original 15 years of the 
compact financial assistance has lapsed. The Committee is 
generally pleased with the progress the governments have made 
concerning renegotiating the financial terms of the compacts of 
free association. The Committee expects the Department to 
continue to be involved in this process and to keep the 
Committee regularly apprised. The Committee strongly encourages 
all parties to complete the negotiation early this summer and 
complete a legislative and budget proposal by early fall, 2002.

                        Departmental Management


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $69,946,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        78,596,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        72,533,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +2,587,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        -6,063,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $72,533,000 for departmental 
management, a decrease of $6,063,000 below the budget request 
and $2,587,000 above the enacted level. The Committee has not 
provided $2,395,000 for milar window protection because 
substantial funds were provided in the emergency supplemental 
under the General Services Administration account for this 
purpose.
    The Committee is concerned about the lack of communications 
regarding key policy decisions and public announcements at the 
Department. The Committee has reduced the Department's 
Congressional Affairs office and the Communications office by 
$200,000 each.
    The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 
positive environmental benefits achieved by the military 
through the implementation of pulse technology as a major 
component of its battery management programs. The Committee 
believes that the Department of the Interior would also benefit 
significantly and directly from the use of this technology to 
extend the life of vehicle batteries. These benefits include 
savings in battery replacement costs, reduction in overall 
maintenance costs for vehicles and ancillary equipment, and a 
resultant increase in safety for personnel. The Committee urges 
the Department to incorporate this technology in its ongoing 
purchase and maintenance programs for vehicles. The Department 
should report to the Committee by December 31, 2002, on its 
plans to comply with this direction. Beginning with the fiscal 
year 2004 budget request, the budget submission should include 
an accounting of the extent to which battery pulse technology 
is being employed and the savings expected and realized as a 
result of the use of this technology.

                        Office of the Solicitor


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $45,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        47,773,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        47,473,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +2,473,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................          -300,000


    The Committee recommends $47,473,000 for the Office of the 
Solicitor, a decrease of $300,000 from the budget request and 
$2,473,000 above the enacted level.

                      Office of Inspector General


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $34,302,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        36,659,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        36,239,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +1,937,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................          -420,000


    The Committee recommends $36,239,000 for the Office of the 
Inspector General, a decrease of $420,000 below the budget 
request and $1,937,000 above the enacted level.
    The reduction provides the same rate of uncontrollable 
expenses as provided for other Interior bureaus.

                   National Indian Gaming Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................                 0
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         2,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         2,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +2,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for the National Indian 
Gaming Commission the same as the budget request and $2,000,000 
above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

             Office of Special Trustee for American Indians


                         FEDERAL TRUST PROGRAMS




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $99,224,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................      $151,027,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       141,277,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +42,053,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        -9,750,000


    The Committee recommends $141,277,000 for the office of 
special trustee for American Indians, $9,750,000 below the 
budget request and $42,053,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
enacted level.
    Executive direction.--The Committee recommends $2,530,000 
for executive direction, an increase above the 2002 level of 
$34,000 for fixed costs.
    Operations.--The Committee recommends $39,516,000 for 
operations, including increases above the 2002 level of 
$15,767,000 for fixed costs, $4,848,000 for the office of trust 
fund management, and $2,400,000 for field operations.
    Litigation support and records.--The Committee recommends 
$3,129,000 for litigation support and records, including 
increases above the 2002 level of $80,000 for fixed costs, 
$200,000 for records operations, and $300,000 for litigation 
support.
    Program support services.--The Committee recommends 
$5,451,000 for program support services, including a program 
increase above the 2002 level of $1,226,000 and a decrease of 
$503,000 for fixed costs.
    Improvement initiatives.--The Committee recommends 
$90,651,000 for improvement initiatives, including increases 
above the 2002 level of $2,500,000 for OST data cleanup, 
$2,000,000 for BIA data cleanup, $4,000,000 for records 
management, $4,000,000 for policies and procedures, $1,000,000 
for risk management, $5,050,000 for trust improvement 
coordination, $1,975,000 for the three trust breaches, 
$7,500,000 for historical accounting, and $10,000,000 for trust 
net to address high-priority computer security problems, and 
decreases of $14,124,000 for fixed costs, $2,000,000 for the 
probate cleanup, $2,000,000 for trust asset account management 
system, and $2,200,000 for training.
    Bill Language.--The Committee remains very concerned about 
the escalating costs associated with the Cobell v. Norton 
litigation and with the effect this litigation is having on the 
Department's trust reform efforts. Therefore, the Committee has 
included a number of legislative provisions (under General 
Provisions, Department of the Interior) it believes are 
important in moving the trust reform process forward.
    The Committee has included a general provision to address 
the issue of releasing the Ernst and Young study, and has 
included legislative language in the Office of Special Trustee 
account to address the issue of an historical accounting. In 
the Fiscal Year 2002 Joint Explanatory Statement of the 
Committee of Conference, the managers reiterated their position 
that they will not appropriate hundreds of millions of dollars 
for a historical accounting whose outcome is unlikely to be 
successful. The Committee now believes that a transaction-by-
transaction accounting for all accounts without regard to when 
the funds were deposited could cost as much as $1 billion. The 
allocation of these funds would have a devastating effect on 
Indian country by siphoning scarce resources away from critical 
Indian programs.
    The Committee's concern is reinforced by the opposition of 
plaintiffs in Cobell v. Norton to disclose the results of the 
Ernst and Young report on the historical accounting of the five 
named plaintiffs and their predecessors. Accordingly, the 
Committee has included a requirement for disclosure to the 
Committee of a summary of the Ernst and Young report. Congress 
provided nearly $20 million to conduct this accounting and the 
Committee believes that the results of this accounting will 
provide important information for determining whether this 
expenditure was a wise use of appropriated funds, and to serve 
as a benchmark to determine the extent to which future 
appropriations for this type of activity are warranted.
    The Committee has also included a provision limiting the 
historical accounting to a more defined period. By limiting the 
historical accounting, the Committee will focus its limited 
resources on a manageable group of accounts for which results 
can be produced within a reasonable period of time and at a 
more reasonable cost. By specifying the starting date for the 
accounting, it is the Committee's intent that the balance in 
each account as of that date shall be accepted as correct for 
purposes of the accounting. This provision also includes 
language limiting, until further action by the Congress, any 
historical accounting beyond that described in the provision.
    Further accounting shall not proceed until the Committees 
on Appropriations and the relevant Committees of jurisdiction 
have had an opportunity to review the comprehensive plan now 
under development by the Department, the Ernst and Young 
report, and the results of the focused accounting funded in 
this bill. Such a review will provide the Congress the 
opportunity to consider options for further accounting or other 
legislative remedies.
    The Committee notes that the Special Master and the Court 
Monitor appointed by the Court to review various aspects of 
trust reform at the Department are receiving compensation for 
their activities that exceed those of the Chief Justice and the 
Vice President of the United States. The Committee believes 
that, by any measure, the current level of compensation is 
excessive. Therefore, given current fiscal and budgetary 
constraints, the Committee has included a general provision 
that caps the compensation for each of these Court Officers at 
no more than 200 percent of the highest Senior Executive 
Service rate of pay. For fiscal year 2003, that maximum amount 
is $276,400.
    With minor exceptions the current Special Trustee Advisory 
Board has been in place since the Board was first constituted, 
even though the Trust Reform Act established a nine member 
Board to be appointed by the Special Trustee for a period of 
two years. Recent events, including the EDS report, the 
decision to replace the High Level Implementation Plan with a 
new Strategic Plan, the Secretary's proposal to create a new 
organizational structure to address trust reform, and the 
establishment of a new Office of Historical Trust Accounting, 
speak to the need for a new board with a new perspective and 
fresh ideas. In addition, the Committee remains concerned over 
the appearance of a conflict of interest having the named 
plaintiff in the Cobell v. Norton litigation on the Advisory 
Board. Therefore, the Committee has included a general 
provision requiring the appointment of a new advisory board.
    The Committee is very concerned that the ongoing Cobell v. 
Norton litigation is jeopardizing the ability of the Department 
of the Interior to successfully implement trust reform. The 
Committee finds it particularly troubling that almost every 
individual in a position of leadership has been subject to a 
contempt of court motion by the plaintiffs in the case. It is 
clear to the Committee that this legal strategy is resulting in 
some of the best people having to recuse themselves from 
working on trust reform, and it is becoming more difficult for 
the Department to hire talented people to take on the difficult 
responsibilities. If this situation continues unabated it will 
surely result in the inability of the Department to implement 
trust reform. To help ameliorate this extraordinary situation, 
the Committee has included a general provision that would help 
the employees in the Department pay for legal costs arising 
from this litigation. It is the Committee's hope that this 
language will create sufficient incentives to allow the 
Department to continue to seek out the best and the brightest 
for this challenging work.

                       INDIAN LAND CONSOLIDATION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $10,980,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         7,980,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         7,980,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        -3,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $7,980,000 for Indian land 
consolidation the same as the budget request and $3,000,000 
below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.

           Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration


                NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT FUND

    The purpose of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment Fund 
is to provide the basis for claims against responsible parties 
for the restoration of injured natural resources. Assessments 
ultimately will lead to the restoration of injured resources 
and reimbursement for reasonable assessment costs from 
responsible parties through negotiated settlements or other 
legal actions. Operating on a ``polluter pays'' principle, the 
program anticipates recovering over $54 million in receipts in 
fiscal year 2002, with the vast majority to be used for the 
restoration of injured resources. The program works to restore 
sites ranging in size from small town landfills to the Exxon 
Valdez oil spill of 1989 in Alaska.
    Prior to fiscal year 1999, this account was included under 
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service appropriation. The 
account was moved under the Departmental Offices heading 
because its functions relate to several different bureaus 
within the Department of the Interior.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $5,497,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         5,538,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         5,538,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................           +41,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $5,538,000 for the natural 
resource damage assessment fund, which is equal to the budget 
request and $41,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. The 
Committee encourages the Service to use the National Fish and 
Wildlife Foundation for some of its restoration work under this 
program. The Foundation has a proven track record in 
establishing partnerships and leveraging Federal funds for 
habitat restoration.

             GENERAL PROVISIONS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    The Committee recommends continuing several provisions 
carried in previous bills as follows. Sections 101 and 102 
provide for emergency transfer authority with the approval of 
the Secretary. Section 103 provides for warehouse and garage 
operations and for reimbursement for those services. Section 
104 provides for vehicle and other services. Section 105 
provides for uniform allowances. Section 106 provides for 
twelve-month contracts. Sections 107 through 110 prohibit the 
expenditure of funds for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) leasing 
activities in certain areas. These OCS provisions are addressed 
under the Minerals Management Service in this report. Section 
111 limits the investment of Federal funds by tribes and tribal 
organizations to obligations of the United States or 
obligations insured by the United States. Section 112 prohibits 
the National Park Service from reducing recreation fees for 
non-local travel through any park unit. Section 113 continues 
permitting the transfer of funds between the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee for American Indians.
    Section 114 provides permanent authority to the Secretary 
of the Interior to negotiate and enter into agreements and 
leases with certain entities associated with Fort Baker. The 
language permits funds to be retained from leases and proceeds 
from agreements, for the preservation, restoration, operation, 
maintenance and interpretation of Fort Baker. The funds are 
available until expended.
    Section 115 continues a provision allowing the hiring of 
administrative law judges to address the Indian probate 
backlog.
    Section 116 permits the redistribution of tribal priority 
allocation and tribal base funds to alleviate funding 
inequities.
    Section 117 continues a provision requiring the allocation 
of Bureau of Indian Affairs postsecondary schools funds 
consistent with unmet needs.
    Section 118 continues a provision limiting the use of the 
Huron Cemetery in Kansas City to religious purposes.
    Section 119 continues a provision permitting the conveyance 
of the Twin Cities Research Center of the former Bureau of 
Mines for the benefit of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
    Section 120 extends for one year a provision regarding the 
use of transportation fees under the National Parks Omnibus 
Management Act of 1998.
    Section 121 continues a provision authorizing a cooperative 
agreement with the Golden Gate National Parks Association.
    Section 122 continues a provision permitting the Bureau of 
Land Management to retain funds from the sale of seeds and 
seedlings.
    Section 123 continues a provision permitting the sale of 
improvements and equipment at the White River Oil Shale Mine in 
Utah and the retention and use of those funds by the Bureau of 
Land Management and the General Services Administration.
    Section 124 continues a provision authorizing the Secretary 
of the Interior to use helicopter or motor vehicles to capture 
and transport horses and burros at the Sheldon and Hart 
National Wildlife Refuges.
    Section 125 authorizes federal funds for Shenandoah Valley 
Battlefield NHD and Ice Age NST to be transferred to a State, 
local government, or other governmental land management entity 
for acquisition of lands.
    Section 126 continues a provision prohibiting the closure 
of the underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns NP, NM.
    Section 127 continues a provision preventing the demolition 
of a bridge between New Jersey and Ellis Island.
    Section 128 continues a provision prohibiting the posting 
of signs at Canaveral National Seashore as clothing optional 
areas if it is inconsistent with county ordinance.
    Section 129 permits the use of funds for incidental 
expenses related to promoting the Centennial of the National 
Wildlife Refuge System.
    Section 130 authorizes the National Park Service to enter 
into a cooperative agreement with Capitol Concerts.
    Section 131 requires the Department of the Interior to 
provide a summary of the Ernst and Young report on the 
historical accounting of the named plaintiffs in Cobell v. 
Norton.
    Section 132 limits compensation for the Special Master and 
Court Monitor appointed by the Court in Cobell v. Norton to 200 
percent of the highest Senior Executive Service rate of pay.
    Section 133 requires the Special Trustee for American 
Indian to appointment new Advisory Board members.
    Section 134 allows the Secretary to pay private attorney 
fees for employees and former employees incurred in connection 
with Cobell v. Norton.
    Section 135 allows the Interior firefighting Bureaus to 
engage in firefighting activities on non-Federal lands.
    Section 136 extends the deadline for submission of reports 
and termination of the Commission to create a National Museum 
of African American History and Culture Plan for Action to 
September 30, 2003.
    Section 137 makes funds appropriated in the Labor, Health 
and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2002, for the National 
Museum of African American History and Culture Plan for Action 
Presidential Commission, available until expended.
    Section 138 ensures that the Department of the Interior, 
with significant technical expertise and stewardship 
responsibilities for one-half of the remaining Everglades, is 
included as a full partner with the Army Corps and the State of 
Florida agencies in the interagency and interdisciplinary team 
known as ``RECOVER''. Under the Comprehensive Everglades 
Restoration Plan recently authorized by Congress, RECOVER is 
responsible for assessing, evaluating and integrating the 
numerous projects that comprise the Comprehensive Everglades 
Restoration Plan so that the goals and purposes of the Plan, 
including the restoration of the Everglades natural system, are 
achieved. Including the Department of the Interior as a full 
partner will ensure that Interior's significant technical 
expertise is fully utilized and that the primary Federal 
interest in the Comprehensive Plan, the restoration of the 
Everglades, is achieved.
    Section 139 requires the Fish and Wildlife Service to mark 
hatchery salmon.
    Section 140 names the visitor center at the Bitter Lake 
National Wildlife Refuge in New Mexico the Joseph R. Skeen 
Visitor Center.
    Section 141 establishes a thirteen member Commission to 
study the effect of gaming on Indian country.

                      TITLE II-- RELATED AGENCIES


                       DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


                             Forest Service

    The U.S. Forest Service manages 192 million acres of public 
lands for multiple use Nationwide, including lands in 44 States 
and Puerto Rico. The Forest Service administers a wide variety 
of programs, including forest and rangeland research, State and 
private forestry assistance, wildfire suppression and fuels 
reduction, cooperative forest health programs, and human 
resource programs. The National Forest System (NFS) includes 
155 National forests, 20 National grasslands, 20 National 
recreation areas, a National tallgrass prairie, 5 National 
monuments, and 6 land utilization projects. The NFS is managed 
for multiple use, including timber production, recreation, 
wilderness, minerals, grazing, fish and wildlife habitat 
management, and soil and water conservation.
    During the past two years the Congress has funded the 
national fire plan submitted by the Secretaries of Agriculture 
and the Interior and the governors. The Committee remains 
committed to the national fire plan and understands that this 
requires the long-term involvement of Federal, State and local 
governments and tribes, working with citizens and industries. 
The Committee has invested in a broad program which: (1) 
provides firefighting resources and personnel; (2) funds 
rehabilitation and restoration; (3) invests in active 
management to reduce wildfire risk by reducing hazardous fuels; 
(4) provides State, volunteer and community assistance and 
invests in research and development; and (5) requires continual 
and careful accountability to monitor performance. If 
appropriated funds are insufficient during emergency 
situations, other available funds may be used for fire 
suppression but the Administration must take action to 
replenish these funds so that the normal program of work of 
non-fire activities is not halted. The National Fire Plan is 
discussed in more detail under the wildland fire management 
account heading.

                     FOREST AND RANGELAND RESEARCH

    Research and development sponsors basic and applied 
scientific research. This research provides both credible and 
relevant knowledge about forests and rangelands and new 
technologies that can be used to sustain the health, 
productivity, and diversity of private and public lands to meet 
the needs of present and future generations. Research is 
conducted across the U.S. through six research stations, the 
Forest Products Laboratory, and the International Institute of 
Tropical Forestry in Puerto Rico as well as cooperative 
research efforts with many of the Nation's universities. The 
Committee stresses that this research and development should 
support all of the Nation's forests and rangelands and that 
technology transfer and practical applications are vital.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $241,304,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       242,798,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       252,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +10,696,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +9,202,000


    The Committee recommends $252,000,000 for forest and 
rangeland research, $9,202,000 above the budget request and 
$10,696,000 above the 2002 funding level. The Committee rejects 
the proposed budget and allocations as they are poorly 
conceived and were not coordinated at all with key 
constituencies. The Committee's recommended allocation does not 
make funding available for the program initiatives and 
redirections contained in the budget request.
    The Committee expects that future budget submissions will 
be responsive to recommendations in the recent National 
Research Council report, ``National Capacity in Forestry 
Research'', and input from the Secretary's Forestry Research 
advisory council, the National Association of Professional 
Forestry Schools and Colleges, the State foresters, and 
industry and public user groups. The Committee also expects 
that future budgets will be better coordinated with other USDA 
and Department of the Interior research bureaus and be 
responsive to the national fire plan and other key agency 
efforts such as invasive species and long-term forest 
productivity, as well as areas of demonstrated Congressional 
support. The Committee also encourages the Forest Service to 
reevaluate the current budget structure and determine if the 
public might not be better served with explicit line items and 
associated outcomes as was the case in the past.
    The overall allocation includes $241,304,000, the same 
funding level as in 2002, plus an increase of $3,000,000 for 
the forest inventory and analysis (FIA) program, a $1,700,000 
increase for the advanced housing research consortium which 
includes work at Mississippi State University and other 
universities, a total of $300,000 for the International Arid 
Lands Consortium ($300,000 is also in State and private 
forestry for an agency-wide total of $600,000), a $500,000 
increase for work on adelgids and other insects in the east, 
and a $500,000 increase for research on sudden oak death in the 
west. The remaining increase is for fixed costs, and included 
in the funds provided is $531,000 for anticipated additional 
costs to be incurred by the Pacific Northwest Research Station 
as a result of administrative services provided by region six 
of the Forest Service. The Committee is providing full funding 
at the 2002 level for previously designated Congressional 
priorities. These projects include, among others, the CROP 
effort on the Colville national forest, WA, National 
Agroforestry Center, NE, Bent Creek, NC, Coweeta Lab, NC, 
Olympic Natural Resource Center, WA, and urban forestry at 
Syracuse, NY and Davis, CA.
    The Committee directs that the Forest Service obtain 
approval from the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations 
before closing any research work unit or locations.
    The forest inventory and analysis (FIA) program within 
research is funded at the fiscal year 2002 level, $36,498,000, 
plus an additional $3,000,000 mentioned above. The Committee 
encourages the States to help cost-share the program. The 
Committee has also included FIA funding in other accounts. 
State and Private forestry includes $9,000,000 for cost-share 
efforts within the forest resource information and analysis 
activity ($4,004,000 above the request) and $2,810,000 within 
the forest health activities. The National forest system 
account includes $6,200,000 for FIA activities within the 
inventory and monitoring activity. The FIA total recommended 
funding is $57,508,000. This is more than double the 
appropriated funding provided in fiscal year 1998.

                       STATE AND PRIVATE FORESTRY

    Through cooperative programs with State and local 
governments, forest industry, conservation organizations, and 
non-industrial private forest landowners, the Forest Service 
supports the protection and management of the nearly 500 
million acres of non-Federal forests in the country. Technical 
and financial assistance is offered to improve wildland fire 
management and protect communities from wildfire; control 
insects and disease; improve harvesting and processing of 
forest products; conserve environmentally important forests; 
and enhance stewardship of urban and rural forests. The Forest 
Service provides special expertise and disease suppression for 
all Federal and tribal lands, as well as cooperative assistance 
with the States for State and private lands.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $291,221,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       277,363,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       279,828,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       -11,393,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +2,465,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $279,828,000 for State and private 
forestry, $2,465,000 above the budget request and $11,393,000 
below the 2002 funding level. This funding includes 
$133,133,000 within the conservation spending category.
    Forest health management.--The Committee recommends 
$81,412,000 for forest health management, $32,000 above the 
request and $13,108,000 above the enacted. The Committee 
reiterates its concern with forest health in the broad sense 
and has added bill language to clarify that forest health 
activities may include treatments for invasive or noxious 
plants. The Committee expects the Forest Service to keep insect 
and disease risk maps up-to-date and provide the Congress with 
updated maps as they become available. The Committee rejects 
the administration's proposal for an emerging pest fund that 
came with unrealistic restrictions. Instead, the Committee has 
added this funding to the base program in order to fund fully 
imminent pest problems and the ongoing base program. This 
funding should fully fund the Slow-the-spread gypsy moth 
program and provide additional resources for work to control 
and manage the Asian long-horned beetle in urban settings and 
adelgids in the east. Under the wildland fire management 
heading the Committee has added additional resources to help 
prevent outbreaks and restore forests affected by southern pine 
beetles, mountain bark beetles, sudden oak death, and other 
pests and pathogens.
    Cooperative fire protection.--The Committee recommends 
$30,393,000 for cooperative fire protection in the State and 
private forestry account, $30,000 above the 2002 funding level 
and equal to the budget request for these activities. The 
Committee has also provided $11,805,000 above the budget 
request for the cooperative fire portion of the national fire 
plan within the wildland fire management account, including 
$58,000,000 for State fire assistance and $8,500,000 for 
volunteer fire assistance.
    Cooperative forestry.--The Committee recommends 
$162,023,000 for cooperative forestry, $1,469,000 above the 
budget request and $25,268,000 below the 2002 funding level. 
This funding includes $133,133,000 within the conservation 
spending category, $14,425,000 above the request and 
$32,133,000 above the enacted level for these activities. The 
conservation spending category includes $60,000,000 for forest 
legacy, $36,235,000 for urban and community forestry, and 
$36,898,000 for forest stewardship. Funding for the forest 
legacy program is derived from the land and water conservation 
fund (LWCF), as requested. Forest stewardship program funding 
does not come from the LWCF although the Administration did 
make that request.
    Forest stewardship.--The Committee recommends $36,898,000 
for forest stewardship, $12,628,000 below the request and 
$3,727,000 above the enacted level. The proposed new 
initiatives are not funded. The 2002 funding level is 
maintained for the Chesapeake Bay program ($750,000), the 
National Agroforestry Center ($420,000) and activities in the 
New York City watershed ($500,000). The Committee notes the 
large infusion of new mandatory funding from the Farm Security 
and Rural Investment Act of 2002, which includes up to 
$5,000,000 in 2002 and $20,000,000 in 2003 for the Forest Land 
Enhancement program and which replaces the stewardship 
incentives and forest incentives programs. The Committee 
directs the Forest Service to include in its subsequent budget 
justifications a clear exposition of plans for this mandatory 
funding and how this new program relates to and interacts with 
cooperative forestry programs receiving discretionary funding.
    Forest legacy program.--The Committee recommends 
$60,000,000 for the forest legacy program, $9,797,000 below the 
request and $5,000,000 below the enacted level. The Committee 
recommends the following distribution of funds:


                                                            Committee
        State                      Project               Recommendation

AL                     Coon Gulf, phase 2.............        $2,000,000
CO                     Spruce Mountain Ranch..........         1,875,000
CT                     Stone House Brook Project......         1,100,000
DE                     Green Horizons, phase 2........         2,000,000
GA                     Pine Mountain..................         5,000,000
GA                     Sheffield......................           100,000
HI                     McCandless Ranch...............         1,300,000
IA                     Yellow River Forest Project....           700,000
IL                     Coon Creek Woods...............            95,000
IL                     Kite River.....................           305,000
IN                     Mt. Tea Ridge..................         1,600,000
MA                     Karner Brook Ridge.............           525,000
MA                     Camp Hi-rock...................           500,000
MD                     Pintail........................           150,000
MD                     Deer Creek.....................           150,000
ME                     Leavitt Plantation.............           600,000
MN                     North Duluth, phase 1&2........           410,000
MT                     Schumann.......................           600,000
NC                     RPM project....................         3,000,000
NC                     Fort Bragg borderlands.........           600,000
NH                     Connecticut Lakes Headwaters...         4,000,000
NJ                     Lake Gerard, New Jersey                 4,000,000
                        Highlands.
NM                     Lagunas Bonitas................         1,500,000
NY                     East Branch Fish Creek, phase 2         1,500,000
OR                     South Eugene Hills.............         1,062,000
OR                     Coburg Hills...................         1,000,000
PR                     Rio Abajo North area, phase 2..         1,000,000
RI                     Weetamoo Woods, phase 2........           250,000
RI                     Duvall Trail Corridor..........           200,000
SC                     Great Pee Dee river, Coastal            4,000,000
                        Forests phase 3.
TN                     Anderson--Tully................         3,500,000
TN                     Jim Creek, Pickett State Forest           838,000
TN                     McLaughlin tract...............           800,000
UT                     Castle Rock, phase 2...........         2,000,000
UT                     Range Creek #3.................         1,550,000
VA                     Sandy Point....................           575,000
VA                     Romine project.................           600,000
VA                     Buffalo River Crossing.........           200,000
VT                     Monitor Barns..................           300,000
WA                     Skykomish River Landscape,                920,000
                        phase 2.
WI                     Bad River Headwaters...........         3,450,000
                                                       -----------------
                         Project subtotal.............        55,855,000
                       Forest Service program                  4,145,000
                        administration and AON
                        planning.
                                                       -----------------
                         Total........................        60,000,000



    During the past year the Committee has examined the forest 
legacy program in great detail and finds that there are 
substantial management problems. This includes problems with 
national direction and oversight, coordination, priority 
setting, and especially, financial management. The details of 
these findings are contained in a report dated June 14, 2002, 
which the Committee will publish so all interested parties have 
access. The Committee still feels that there is merit to the 
forest legacy conservation easement approach with its heavy 
State involvement, but substantial changes will be required at 
all levels of its operation. The Committee has increased forest 
legacy program administration funding by $292,000 above the 
request in order to enhance program and financial management 
and provide funds for certain priority land or easement 
appraisals or appraisal reviews.
    The Committee directs the Forest Service to submit a 5-year 
forest legacy program strategy that includes planned funding 
requirements. The strategy should identify where funds will be 
focused to provide the greatest national benefit and contain a 
proposed project selection process supportive of the 5-year 
strategy. The Committee further directs the Forest Service to 
revise and finalize its Forest Legacy Program Implementation 
Guidelines by December 31, 2002. The revised guidelines should 
include definitive guidance regarding project definition, cost 
shares, monitoring, appraisals, and other areas of concern 
noted in the Committee's report, dated June 14, 2002, 
describing its review of the program.
    The Committee directs the Forest Service to develop a 
policy regarding the Federal review of appraisals for Forest 
Legacy projects that will ensure those appraisals are meeting 
Federal standards.
    The Committee is concerned with the manner in which cost 
share is calculated. The Committee directs that the Forest 
Service require that 25% of the total cost of each project be 
non-Federal and that grants not be awarded unless this cost 
share can be met. The cost share may include donated funds or 
donated interests-in-lands or lands, but it may not include the 
operating or administrative costs associated with appraisals, 
monitoring or other administrative aspects of the program by 
States or other partners.
    The Committee also expects that each conservation easement 
or land transfer contract clearly indicate that the State will 
monitor and evaluate the subsequent land use for the length of 
the easement and periodically report to the Forest Service. 
Contracts should also provide for public access unless it would 
clearly be injurious to special natural resource values.
    The Committee is concerned that forest legacy program 
managers are not using the Forest Service's official financial 
accounting system, the Foundation Financial Information System 
(FFIS), to manage forest legacy funds. The Committee directs 
the Forest Service to ensure FFIS contains accurate and 
complete expenditure information for forest legacy grants and 
that it supports program management information requirements. 
The Committee further directs the Forest Service to improve the 
ability of FFIS to track the status of individual projects by: 
(1) defining what constitutes a forest legacy'' project,'' and 
(2) requiring separate grants for each project. The Committee 
directs the Forest Service to use a single grant authorization 
and payment system for the forest legacy program. The Committee 
expects that forest legacy grants will not be awarded to 
``geographical areas'' such as the West Branch and South 
Carolina Coastal Restoration projects, rather the grants should 
be for specific identified tracts.
    The Committee notes that it did not provide funding 
allocations requested in the budget of $500,000 each to eight 
States which have yet to qualify for the forest legacy program. 
According to the Forest Service statements in the hearing 
record, these States are still completing their assessments of 
need; the States have not even established forest legacy areas, 
and they have no project proposals yet. The Committee action 
will prevent the funding of questionable projects which has 
occurred in the recent past when States received funding with 
no project stipulations.
    The Committee is concerned that the proposed restructuring 
of the West Branch project, ME, may not serve the best 
interests of the Nation or the forest legacy program. This 
project has gone through major changes. When first proposed to 
the Congress it was to provide conservation easements for over 
600,000 acres. The project then was advertised by Maine as a 
$30,000,000 total project on 333,000 acres, requiring a 
$20,000,000 forest legacy investment. Now, the Committee 
understands that Maine hopes to utilize about $20,000,000 in 
forest legacy program funds to purchase 47,000 acres fee simple 
and expects the Forest Society of Maine to complete a separate 
$12,000,000 conservation easement on adjoining 282,000 acres. 
The Committee directs that the Appropriations Committees of 
both Houses of Congress shall be notified at least thirty days 
in advance of any proposal to commit or obligate funds for this 
project. Further, before any Federal funds are expended on this 
project, the Committee directs the Forest Service to 
demonstrate that the State and private cost share of 
$12,000,000 will be available and applied by January 2004, in 
order that the planned leveraging of forest legacy funds for 
this project is not diminished.
    Urban and community forestry.--The Committee recommends 
$36,235,000 for the urban and community forestry activity as 
requested, $235,000 above the 2002 funding level. This 
recommendation includes $500,000 to support the Northeastern 
Pennsylvania community forestry program and $1,000,000 for the 
Chicago Greenstreets program. Last year the Committee 
encouraged the Forest Service to use urban and community 
forestry funds to develop special living memorials, using 
trees, to commemorate the tragic events of September 11, 2001. 
The Forest Service targeted $1,500,000 of available funds for 
this special emphasis program. The results have been tremendous 
but the work of creating lasting memorials for individuals and 
communities has not been completed. Accordingly, the Committee 
directs the Forest Service, working in close harmony with the 
involved States and local participants, to focus the same level 
of funding in fiscal year 2003 for planning, development, and 
implementation of the living memorial projects in New York, 
Pennsylvania, Virginia, and critical surrounding areas.
    Economic action programs.--The Committee recommends 
$19,890,000 for economic action programs, $15,790,000 below the 
2002 level and $19,890,000 above the request. Within the 
economic action program the Committee recommends the following 
distribution of funds:
                                                               Committee
        Program component                                 recommendation
Economic recovery.......................................      $5,000,000
Rural development.......................................       5,000,000
Forest products conservation & recycling................       1,500,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Special projects:
    Allegheny NF area regional tourism, PA..............         200,000
    Arid Lands Research Consortium......................         300,000
    Cradle of forestry conservation ed, NC..............         590,000
    Cradle of forestry sustainability study, NC.........         150,000
    Four Corners Sustainable Forestry...................       1,000,000
    Gonzaga Univ. Inland NW Natural Resources Research 
      Center, WA........................................       1,000,000
    KY mine waste reforestation.........................       1,000,000
    Lake Tahoe erosion control grants, CA NV............       2,000,000
    NY City watershed enhancement.......................       1,000,000
    Univ. WA landscape management.......................         250,000
    Univ. WA and WA St. U. extension forestry...........         900,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal, special projects........................       8,390,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total economic action.............................      19,890,000
    The Committee disagrees with the administration's proposal 
to eliminate entirely the economic action programs. These cost 
share efforts provide vital capacity building for rural 
communities which can aid greatly the forest dependent 
communities. The Committee has agreed to phase out the Pacific 
Northwest Assistance specific funding line item but the funding 
for economic recovery and rural development are increased to 
partially offset this change. Pacific Northwest area 
communities may compete for these funds on an equal footing 
with other forest dependent communities. The conservation 
education funding for the Cradle of Forestry and the Pisgah 
Forest Institute is to the Educational Research Consortium of 
Western North Carolina.
    Forest resource information and analysis.--The Committee 
has provided $9,000,000, $4,004,000 above the request and 
$3,985,000 above the 2002 enacted level for the Forest resource 
information and analysis activity created in fiscal year 2001. 
These funds should be used in partnership with the State 
foresters and others to enhance the forest inventory and 
analysis program, which is managed within the forest research 
and development branch. The funds should be used to accelerate 
the inventory cycle time.
    International forestry.--International forestry is provided 
$6,000,000, $964,000 above the request and $737,000 above the 
fiscal year 2002 funding level. The Committee is encouraged by 
the successful partnerships in the international program. The 
Committee expects these efforts to continue and the 
international program should provide forestry and timber 
expertise to the Federal government's policy deliberations.

                         National Forest System

    Within the National Forest System, which covers 192 million 
acres, there are 51 congressionally designated areas, including 
20 National recreation areas, and 7 National scenic areas. The 
NFS includes a substantial amount of the Nation's softwood 
inventory. In fiscal year 2000 over 2.54 billion board feet of 
timber was harvested on NFS lands. More than 9,000 farmers and 
ranchers pay for permits to graze cattle, horses, sheep and 
goats on 74 million acres of grassland, open forests, and other 
forage-producing acres of the National forest system. The NFS 
includes over 133,000 miles of trails and 23,000 developed 
facilities, including 4,389 campgrounds, 58 major visitor 
centers, and about one-half of the Nation's ski-lift capacity. 
Wilderness areas cover 35 million acres, nearly two-thirds of 
the wilderness in the contiguous 48 States. The Forest Service 
also has major habitat management responsibilities for more 
than 3,000 species of wildlife and fish, and 10,000 plant 
species and provides important habitat and open space for over 
400 threatened or endangered species. Half of the Nation's big 
game habitat and coldwater fish habitat, including salmon and 
steelhead, is located on National forest system lands and 
waters. In addition, in the 16 western States, where the water 
supply is sometimes critically short, about 55 percent of the 
total annual yield of water is from National forest system 
lands.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................    $1,331,439,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................     1,366,475,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................     1,370,567,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +39,128,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +4,092,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $1,370,567,000 for the National 
forest system, $4,092,000 above the budget request and 
$39,128,000 above the 2002 funding level.
    Land management planning.--The Committee recommends 
$77,395,000 for land management planning, $5,200,000 above the 
request and $7,037,000 above the 2002 level. The Forest Service 
must limit planning activities to these funds and not use other 
funds to support the land management planning activity. The 
Committee has included within the increase a total of 
$2,500,000 to expedite the forest plan revisions for the Black 
Hills NF, SD.
    Inventory and monitoring.--The Committee recommends 
$175,306,000 for inventory and monitoring, $1,000,000 below the 
request, and an increase of $1,990,000 above the 2002 level. 
The Committee notes that this allocation includes $6,200,000, 
as requested, for activities associated with the Forest 
Inventory and Analysis program. Within the allocation the 
Committee has included increases of $500,000 for the Lake Tahoe 
basin and $300,000 for the Waldo Lake basin, OR, for watershed 
assessments and adaptive management activities to develop long-
term, scientifically valid management for these ultra-
oligotrophic watersheds and $180,000 for the National Forests 
of North Carolina for inventories of plants which may be 
harvested or collected.
    Last year the Committee required the Secretary of 
Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to charter an 
interagency group to address rangeland assessment and 
monitoring issues at both local and national scales, and 
develop a coordinated plan and budget to carry out standardized 
soil surveys and ecological classification on all the nation's 
rangelands. The Committee expects the Secretaries to provide a 
detailed progress report by February 1, 2003 on how they have 
responded to that direction and include in the next budget 
justifications a display of the projected budget and personnel 
needs to initiate coordinated inventory, assessment and 
monitoring of the Nation's rangelands on a continuing basis. 
The Forest Service effort should include all staffs involved in 
inventory. USDA agencies, including the Natural Resources 
Conservation Service, should be full partners in this effort.
    Recreation, heritage and wilderness.--The Committee 
recommends $254,444,000 for recreation heritage and wilderness, 
$2,000,000 above the request and $8,944,000 above the 2002 
level. Volunteer work and contributions by the recreation 
community are impressive and accordingly the Committee has 
provided funding increases in support of these efforts. The 
Committee recognizes the national significance and 
responsibility of the Forest Service to administer the Pacific 
Crest, Continental Divide, and Florida National Scenic Trails 
and the Nez Perce National Historic Trail and directs that 
funding for administration and management for these trails be 
increased $1,500,000 above the request. Similarly, funding for 
those parts of the Appalachian, North Country and Ice Age 
National Scenic Trails and the Lewis & Clark, Santa Fe, Anza, 
Iditarod, Oregon, California, Mormon pioneer, Pony Express, 
Overmountain Victory and Trail of Tears National Historic 
trails managed by the Forest Service should be funded $400,000 
above the request. The Committee directs the Forest Service to 
include a report in the fiscal year 2004 budget justification 
indicating the projects, activities and programs accomplished 
along these national scenic and historic trails with these 
funds and the work proposed to be done and the funding needed 
to support work along these trails in the subsequent three 
years.
    The Committee is supportive of work done by the Carhart 
Wilderness training institute. Its funding should be maintained 
at no less than the fiscal year 2002 level. Much of the funding 
for this center is derived from contributions and 
reimbursements by Department of the Interior user agencies. The 
Committee believes that a more stable fiscal planning process 
is necessary so the Department of the Interior is encouraged to 
meet with the Forest Service to determine fiscal requirements 
which should be built into each bureau and agency budget.
    Wildlife and fish habitat management.--The Committee 
recommends $133,948,000 for wildlife and fish habitat 
management, an increase of $442,000 above the request and 
$2,101,000 above the 2002 level. Included in the increase above 
the request is $300,000 to continue the threatened, endangered 
and sensitive species work on the National Forests in North 
Carolina; the remainder is for fixed costs.
    Grazing management.--The Committee recommends $40,850,000 
for grazing management, $5,000,000 above the request and 
$6,075,000 above the 2002 funding level. The Committee has 
provided this large increase to help the forests get on track 
with NEPA work required for updating allotment management 
plans. Within Title III--General Provisions, the Committee has 
included bill language, which provides continuity for permitees 
while these environmental assessments are being completed.
    Forest products.--The Committee recommends $265,353,000 for 
forest products, $600,000 above the request and $987,000 below 
the 2002 funding level. The increase includes $300,000 to 
continue the CROP project on the Colville NF, WA and a $300,000 
increase to the base program on the National Forests in North 
Carolina.
    Vegetation and watershed management.--The Committee 
recommends $192,244,000 for vegetation and watershed 
management, $1,600,000 above the budget request and $2,131,000 
above the 2002 funding level. The increase above the request 
includes $1,000,000 for mitigation of abandoned mines on the 
Wayne NF, OH, and $600,000 for watershed improvement activities 
in the Lake Tahoe Basin. The Committee encourages the Forest 
Service to continue partnership activities with the Canaan 
Valley Institute, WV, that are helping to restore Seneca Creek 
and other important aquatic areas.
    Minerals and geology management.--The Committee recommends 
$51,635,000 for minerals and geology management, $2,000,000 
below the request and $2,679,000 above the 2002 funding level.
    Land ownership management.--The Committee recommends 
$97,016,000 for land ownership management, $6,000,000 above the 
request and $8,582,000 above the 2002 funding level. The 
Committee provides this increase because of the huge 
operational backlog and shortfall in this program area, which 
provides vital, basic public service. The Committee directs the 
Forest Service to maintain the full time lands team to work on 
the Pacific Crest Trail project and other similar projects, and 
focus on those trails segments where access and public service 
needs are greatest.
    Law enforcement operations.--The Committee recommends 
$81,392,000 for law enforcement operations, $1,250,000 above 
the budget request and $2,392,000 above the 2002 funding level. 
This funding includes a total of $750,000 for the special law 
enforcement problems associated with marijuana eradication in 
the Daniel Boone National Forest and $500,000 for drug control 
problems on the Mark Twain NF, MO.
    Other.--The Committee has provided $984,000 as requested 
for management of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, NM but 
notes that if there are specific infrastructure needs, such 
funding should be requested under the capital improvement and 
maintenance appropriation and compete with other Forest Service 
projects.
    The Committee directs that overall funding for Land Between 
the Lakes NRA (KY and TN) be no less than $8,400,000. The 
Forest Service should determine the appropriate funding mix 
from all accounts, not just the NFS appropriation.
    The Committee recommendation includes the full funding 
requested by the Administration for the Quincy Library Group 
project in California.
    The Committee has not included the new funding requested in 
the NFS account for transfer to the Interior and Commerce 
departments as reimbursement for endangered species 
consultations. The Committee has retained this authority as in 
the past two years within the wildland fire management account.
    The Committee is pleased that there is an effort underway 
through the interagency invasive species council to deal with 
the serious national problem of invasive species. The Committee 
expects the Agriculture Department, and others, to develop a 
fiscal year 2004 budget crosscut with shared interagency goals, 
interagency strategies, and interagency performance measures. 
The Committee is especially supportive of efforts to develop 
shared interagency performance measures for invasive species 
programs, and encourages the Forest Service and other agencies 
involved in the crosscut to develop these on an expedited 
basis, so that at least some of these performance measures may 
be applied during fiscal year 2003. The next budget 
justification should include a display on this issue.
    Challenge Cost Share Program.--The Committee is concerned 
at the inability of the Forest Service to provide credible and 
accurate information regarding contributions of funds and 
services by third parties. Effective use of the Challenge Cost 
Share program and other opportunities to leverage federal funds 
is essential if the Forest Service is to manage the nation's 
natural resources and provide services to the public. The 
Committee finds the agency's recordkeeping and accomplishment 
reporting in this area to be inadquate and expects prompt 
action to rectify the problem. Accordingly, the agency is 
directed to provide a comprehensive report to the Committee by 
December 31, 2003, reflecting accomplishments through September 
30, 2003. The information shall at a minimum include a display 
of work activities, funds or services contributed by third 
parties, Federal funds leveraged, and accomplishments of the 
Challenge Cost Share program. Further, the Committee directs 
the Forest Service to incorporate this information into the 
development of its field based project work planning system in 
order to assure that reporting on activities associated with 
leveraged Federal funds is integrated with the recurring work 
planning and accomplishment reporting processes of the agency. 
Subsequent budget justifications, beginning with 2004, should 
contain a display of challenge cost share accomplishments and 
plans, by budget line item, as was the case in fiscal year 
2000.

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................    $1,560,349,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................     1,369,138,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................     1,513,449,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       -46,900,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................      +144,311,000


    The Committee recommends $1,513,449,000 for wildland fire 
management, $144,311,000 above the budget request and 
$46,900,000 below the 2002 funding level. The Committee 
recognizes the serious situation concerning wildland fire 
management and the need for a sustained commitment of resources 
and talent throughout the Nation. This effort requires an 
integrated approach utilizing skills across the entire spectrum 
of the agency and from many partners, especially the States.
    The national fire plan agreed to by the Administration and 
the nation's governors includes four major areas of focus, as 
well as the need for accountability and research and 
development for all aspects. The Administration's budget 
request recognizes only two aspects, fighting fires and 
reducing hazardous fuels; the request nearly ignores the other 
two critical aspects: restoration and rehabilitation, and 
community assistance. The Committee has used the scarce 
resources available to support these latter aspects, as well as 
insist on adequate accountability and support for research and 
development for this multi-billion dollar endeavor.
    Bill language.--The Committee has not included the 
Administration's request for a number of changes to bill 
language, such as contracting authorities for hazardous fuels 
or the establishment of what was termed, ``fire plain 
easements''. The Committee has continued bill language from 
fiscal year 2002, which provides expanded contracting and 
cooperative agreement authorities that facilitate wildfire 
management and hazardous fuels reduction activities, especially 
in the wildland-urban interface. The Committee has also 
included bill language as requested allowing the transfer of 
certain funds to the Department of the Interior and the 
Department of Commerce to reimburse Endangered Species Act 
mandated consultation costs incurred during the implementation 
of the wildfire program. The Committee expects that the 
respective Departments will pursue sufficient funds for these 
activities in subsequent years. The Committee remains very 
concerned that the Knutson-Vandenberg (KV) reforestation fund 
has been used to fund emergency fire suppression operations and 
that these funds have not been repaid. The Committee expects 
the Administration to make a good faith effort to repay the KV-
fund so that vital reforestation and land improvement 
activities are not put at jeopardy.
    Wildfire preparedness.--The Committee recommends 
$640,000,000 for wildfire management preparedness, an increase 
of $39,297,000 above the request and $17,382,000 above the 
enacted level.
    The Committee is aware that the Forest Service and the four 
Interior bureaus participating in Wildland Fire Management 
activities use different systems and procedures for determining 
their readiness for control of wildfires. The Committee has 
been informed that the Departments have been engaged in efforts 
to design and develop tools for fire program managers that 
would be used by the Forest Service and all of the Interior 
bureaus. The Committee is encouraged that the Departments have 
been working together to develop common systems to plan their 
activities, however, the Committee is concerned that a complex 
system may require significant funding and take many years to 
develop.
    The Committee therefore directs the Departments to design 
and develop a focused automated system for preparedness 
resource planning to replace the systems currently in use by 
the fire management agencies. The Committee believes a limited 
system can be designed and implemented by the end of fiscal 
year 2004. The development and design of the information 
technology system for fire preparedness will be conducted 
according to standard Federal regulations for planning, 
budgeting, acquisition and management of capital assets. The 
Committee further directs that the agencies deliver quarterly 
progress reports that describe the project status and provide 
updated cost information.
    Wildfire suppression operations.--The Committee recommends 
$420,669,000 for wildfire suppression operations as requested 
in the budget, an increase of $99,378,000 above the total 
funding available for this activity in fiscal year 2002.
    The Committee is concerned about rising suppression costs 
and the lack of incentives to consider costs during a large-
fire incident. The Committee believes that cost containment 
should become more prominent among the priorities for 
suppressing wildland fires. Therefore, the Committee directs 
the Forest Service and the Department of the Interior to take 
the following steps designed to increase cost consciousness 
during such incidents: 1) directly monitor, evaluate, and 
report publicly on the costs of each large-fire incident 
following its conclusion; 2) evaluate and report on the cost-
effectiveness of all Type I and Type II incident management 
teams at the end of each fire season; 3) at the end of each 
year, evaluate and report on the fire costs of each Forest 
Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, 
Bureau of Indian Affairs, and Fish and Wildlife land unit 
experiencing large wildfires that year; and 4) establish a 
uniform, automated cost-reporting system to support these 
requirements efficiently and effectively.
    The Committee is well aware that making progress in 
containing suppression costs will require a dedicated effort by 
many Federal and non-Federal cooperators pursuing a wide range 
of coordinated and vital activities on their own lands to 
manage hazardous fuels appropriately, mitigate wildland-urban 
interface hazards, and improve the effectiveness and efficiency 
of wildland fire suppression. Clearly, the resources required 
to meet these cross-boundary needs will be more than the 
Federal government alone can supply. Therefore, the Committee 
directs the Forest Service and the Department of the Interior 
to develop jointly equitable and effective collaborative 
mechanisms for prioritizing needed activities and sharing their 
costs among the various Federal, State, local, tribal, and 
private landowners involved, including those in wildland-urban 
interface communities.
    To support development of such collaborative mechanisms, 
the Committee directs the Forest Service and the Department of 
the Interior to contract for a thorough, independent study of 
how potential mechanisms, such as a matching grant program, 
could work. This study shall consider how best to take 
advantage of relevant existing Federal programs for disaster 
mitigation, biomass utilization, and community and private fire 
protection programs. The Departments should equally share the 
cost of this study; a preliminary report should be available to 
the Committee by May 31, 2003, and the final report should be 
completed by September 30, 2003.
    The Forest Service shall conduct flight trials under 
appropriate atmospheric conditions to determine the 
applicability of passive millimeter-wave imaging in aiding 
Federal fire fighting missions.
    The Committee has been repeatedly disappointed with the 
inability of the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture to 
produce accurate and timely cost information regarding specific 
fire suppression projects. Agency officials have said that this 
is the result of the use of different accounting and finance 
systems by the wildland fire management agencies. The Committee 
urges the Departments to consider the potential for unified 
accounting for the wildland fire management appropriation 
accounts in the future. We recognize that this would be a long-
term effort. In the meantime, we direct the agencies to 
establish standard coding practices and procedures for fire 
suppression activities beginning in fiscal year 2003. We expect 
the agencies to develop a protocol that would work in each 
financial system and be followed by each agency. The protocol 
should provide clear, standard instructions for assigning cost 
codes to be used for each fire event. The protocol should be 
well-understood and uniformly used by fire management and 
finance officers in each agency. The agencies will be expected 
to produce reports promptly when requested by the Committee. If 
there are any technical impediments to complying with this 
directive, agency finance officials must brief the Committee on 
those impediments and be prepared to offer alternative 
solutions to the project cost reporting problem.
    Other wildfire operations.--The Committee recommends 
$452,750,000 for other wildfire operations, an increase of 
$105,014,000 above the request and an increase of $36,340,000 
above the funding in fiscal year 2002. The Committee recommends 
the following distribution of funds within the Forest Service 
for these vital portions of the national fire plan:

                                            OTHER WILDFIRE OPERATIONS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Committee
                                                               FY 2002 enacted      Request       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous Fuels..............................................         $209,010         $228,109         $228,109
Rehabilitation and restoration...............................           62,668            3,624           63,000
Fire Facilities Backlog......................................           20,376                0           20,376
Research and Development.....................................           27,265           21,427           27,265
Joint Fire Science...........................................            8,000            8,000            8,000
State Fire Assistance........................................           56,383           46,455           58,000
Volunteer Fire Assistance....................................            8,262            8,240            8,500
Forest Health--Federal Lands.................................            6,982            6,955           12,000
Forest Health--Cooperative Lands.............................            4,992            4,979           15,000
Economic Action Programs.....................................           12,472                0           12,500
Fire Plain Easements.........................................                0           19,947                0
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal--Other Wildfire Operations....................          416,410          347,736          452,750
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee has provided the budget request, an increase 
of $19,099,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level, for hazardous 
fuels reduction work. Within this total, the Committee has also 
continued the previous funding of $5,000,000 for the Community 
Forest Restoration Act and up to $15,000,000 for use on 
adjacent non-Federal lands when hazard reduction activities are 
planned on national forest system lands. The Committee strongly 
encourages the Forest Service to work with the University of 
Arizona, or allow the University, to reduce hazardous fuels 
around the telescopes on Mt. Graham, AZ.
    The Committee has provided $20,376,000, which was not 
requested by the Administration but is equal to the 2002 
enacted level, to continue the effort to reduce the wildfire 
facilities maintenance and reconstruction backlog. Adequate 
facilities are essential as increased staffing and resources 
are brought to bear in this program. Within this funding, the 
Committee designates $1,200,000 to rehabilitate the Medford, 
OR, airtanker base. The Committee expects that the State of 
Oregon and the local counties will be full partners in 
maintaining and staffing this base in the future. The Committee 
also includes $650,000 for the interagency wildfire station at 
Pinhook, FL.
    The Committee has also restored $63,000,000 for the burned 
area rehabilitation and restoration program first proposed in 
fiscal year 2001. The Committee expects the Forest Service, in 
close partnership with the Department of the Interior, to 
continue the native plant program with at least $4,000,000 and 
work under the aegis of the Plant Conservation Initiative which 
unites the Federal land managing agencies with many partners; 
this funding should be used to develop a cooperative native 
plant program and not be used merely to support existing 
federal nurseries. This expanded program is designed to go 
beyond emergency stabilization to include the reintroduction of 
native plants into these burned over areas before exotic 
species can gain a foothold and to encourage rural industries 
to produce plant materials.
    The Committee has provided $8,000,000 for the joint fire 
science program, the same as the enacted level. This program is 
producing important scientific and technical information, often 
in collaboration with the nation's forestry schools, that is 
needed to support the large effort concerning hazardous fuels 
and other fire management issues. The Committee has also 
provided funding for research and development activities within 
the national fire plan. The research activities should have 
national scope including the east and the south.
    The Committee has provided $58,000,000 for State fire 
assistance, $11,545,000 above the request and $1,617,000 above 
the enacted level. This funding is in addition to the 
$25,353,000 provided under the State and private forestry 
heading. The Committee feels that the Firewise education effort 
is vitally important and that this effort should be coordinated 
closely with all partners, including especially the Agriculture 
Department's cooperative extension foresters. The Committee has 
also included $8,500,000 for volunteer fire assistance; this 
brings the volunteer fire funding to a total of $13,540,000. 
Other community assistance funding provided in support of the 
national fire plan is $12,500,000 for economic action programs; 
this funding was not requested by the Administration.
    The Committee has provided $27,000,000 for the forest 
health portion of the national fire plan, including $12,000,000 
for Federal lands and $15,000,000 for cooperative efforts with 
the States and others. This funding level is $15,066,000 above 
the request and $15,026,000 above the enacted. This large 
increase is to establish a more integrated approach to forest 
health including prevention, and restoration and rehabilitation 
of forests and rangelands. The Committee expects the Forest 
Service to focus on major problems, such as southern pine 
beetles, western mountain bark beetles, adelgids, and other 
pests and pathogens which harm forests and subsequently 
increase wildfire hazards. The Committee directs the Forest 
Service to increase its operational effort for southern pine 
beetles at its Asheville, NC office, including scientific and 
technical personnel, as well as specialists in treatment, 
prevention, and restoration.
    The Committee has recommended an additional appropriation 
of $500 million to cover unanticipated fiscal year 2002 
wildland fire costs for the Forest Service. The 2002 fire 
system is shaping up to be one of the most catastrophic in 
recent memory. At the beginning of July the amount of forest 
area burned exceeded 3.1 million acres, a figure nearly triple 
the 10 year average for this time of year and a figure almost 
50 percent higher than the disastrous 2000 fire season. 
Officials at the National Interagency Fire Center have 
indicated publicly that they believe the peak of the western 
fire season has yet to come and in late June the U.S. Forest 
Service informed the Committee that its fire suppression budget 
model estimated that $787 million would be required for the 
direct cost of fighting fires during 2002, $466 million above 
the appropriations currently available to the agency. The 
Committee believes that it is essential to provide these 
amounts in order to avoid undue disruptions either in the 
firefighting program or in other Forest Service programs from 
which funds might have to be diverted if appropriations are 
inadequate.

                  CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $546,188,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       552,088,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       572,731,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +26,543,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +20,643,000


    The Committee recommends $572,731,000 for capital 
improvement and maintenance, $26,543,000 above the enacted and 
$20,643,000 above the request. This recommendation includes 
$64,866,000 from the conservation spending category for 
deferred maintenance needs, infrastructure improvement, and 
conservation activities. This conservation category allocation 
is $14,000,000 above the request and $3,866,000 above the 
enacted funding level. The conservation spending category 
funding includes the $50,866,000 requested for priority 
deferred maintenance and an additional $14,000,000 for priority 
fish passage barrier work described below.
    The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
funds:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                FY 2002    2003 budget   Committee   Change from
                     Activity or project                        enacted      request      recomm.      request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facilities:
    Maintenance.............................................      $93,926     $104,786     $104,786            0
    Capital improvement.....................................       70,678       95,714       89,514      -$6,200
    Congressional priorities................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            0
        Allegheny NF Buckaloons, PA.........................  ...........  ...........          436          436
        Allegheny NF Webbs Ferry, PA........................  ...........  ...........          100          100
        Angeles NF, Rubio Canyon rehab, CA..................  ...........  ...........        1,000        1,000
        Big Bear center, CA.................................  ...........  ...........          550          550
        Black Kettle NG collocation, OK.....................  ...........  ...........          750          750
        Cherokee NF, Prince Gap, TN.........................  ...........  ...........          300          300
        Cheoah RD office reconst., NC.......................  ...........  ...........        1,250        1,250
        Cradle Forestry exhibits, NC........................  ...........  ...........          150          150
        D. Boone NF, Cave Run lake planning, KY.............  ...........  ...........          400          400
        Gladie Creek center, KY.............................  ...........  ...........          250          250
        Grey Towers NHS, PA.................................  ...........  ...........          500          500
        Midewin Prairie NTP rehab, IL.......................  ...........  ...........        1,000        1,000
        Nantahala NF Cheoah Point cmpgrd, NC................  ...........  ...........          855          855
        Pisgah NF, Lake Powhatan cmpgrd rehab, NC...........  ...........  ...........          250          250
        San Bernardino NF dogwood cmpgrd rehab, CA..........  ...........  ...........        1,500        1,500
        Stanislaus NF Emigrant impoundments rehab, CA.......  ...........  ...........           80           80
    Subtotal Congressional priorities.......................       20,843            0        9,371        9,371
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal Facilities...................................      185,447      200,500      203,671        3,171
                                                             ===================================================
Roads
    Maintenance.............................................      159,291      153,358      153,358            0
    Capital improvement.....................................       67,600       78,535       77,557         -978
        Umatilla NF, N. Fk. Touchet road rehab, WA..........  ...........  ...........        2,500        2,500
    Subtotal Congressional priorities.......................        2,775  ...........        2,500        2,500
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal Roads........................................      229,666      231,893      233,415        1,522
                                                             ===================================================
Trails
    maintenance.............................................       40,434       36,664       36,664            0
    capital improvement.....................................       26,955       32,165       32,165            0
    Congressional priorities................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            0
        Continental Divide Trail............................  ...........  ...........         1000        1,000
        FL National scenic trail............................  ...........  ...........          500          500
        Ocoee River-Thunder Rock trail, TN..................  ...........  ...........          200          200
        Pike-S.I. NF, Corely Mtn tunnel #3, CO..............  ...........  ...........          250          250
    Subtotal Congressional priorities.......................        2,686  ...........        1,950        1,950
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal Trails.......................................       70,075       68,829       70,779        1,950
                                                             ===================================================
      Total,................................................      485,188      501,222      507,865        6,643
                                                             ===================================================
Conservation category:
    Fish passage barriers...................................  ...........  ...........       14,000       14,000
    Deferred Maintenance....................................       61,000       50,866       50,866            0
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal conservation category........................       61,000       50,866       64,866       14,000
                                                             ===================================================
      Total with conservation category......................      546,188      552,088      572,731       20,643
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Facilities.--The Committee recommends $203,671,000 for 
facilities maintenance and capital improvement, $18,224,000 
above the fiscal year 2002 level and $3,171,000 above the 
request. The Committee has fully funded the requested funds for 
facility maintenance. The Committee is aware of a new Forest 
Service initiative to charge units for a facilities maintenance 
working capital fund. The Committee is willing to let this 
process go forward but we are concerned that the assessments 
should not grow too large and that the fund should be used for 
cyclical maintenance and not as a substitute for Congressional 
review of major capital construction or reconstruction 
projects. The Committee has funded the capital improvement 
request fully but the following projects are not funded: Rapid 
City FSL, SD; Purdue University's Agriculture Hall; Juneau/ANM 
building and associated roads. With the huge backlog of 
dilapidated Federal buildings and labs, it is inappropriate to 
fund a university building. The Committee remains committed to 
the research unit at Rapid City, SD, but understands that the 
current proposals for office expansion and lab collocation are 
too costly; once more appropriate designs are made, the 
Committee will reconsider this project. The Stanislaus NF 
funding is to conduct NEPA analysis on rehabilitation of the 12 
dams mentioned in H.R. 434 which passed the House during the 
107th Congress. The Committee directs that the funds for the 
Grey Towers National Historic Site rehabilitation be contingent 
upon receiving at least equal matching funds from the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania or other sources.
    The Committee has provided funds for the Black Kettle NG, 
OK collocation with the Washita Battlefield National Historic 
Site. The Committee directs the Park Service to make some 
suitable space available at the visitor center to provide basic 
Forest Service information, including historical and current 
program orientation, and also directs that the Forest Service 
not pay more than $20,000 per year for routine maintenance and 
basic utilities provided for all collocated facilities, an 
amount slightly higher than its current expenses. The Committee 
expects that interagency collaboration on facilities, as well 
as cultural and natural resource protection and use, will 
result in greater long-term efficiency and better service to 
the public. To facilitate this collaboration all future 
personnel placements by either agency at these sites should be 
considered for maximum interagency staffing opportunities.
    Roads.--The Committee recommends $233,415,000 for road 
maintenance and capital improvement, $3,749,000 above the 
fiscal year 2002 level and $1,522,000 above the request. The 
Committee has maintained the road decommissioning authority at 
$15,000,000. The Committee expects to continue to receive 
regular updates, and a continued display in the budget 
justification, on progress in addressing the huge backlog of 
deferred maintenance and repair, especially as it relates to 
the activities funded through the road and trails fund and the 
infrastructure improvement funds provided in the conservation 
spending category.
    Recreation on public lands continues to increase rapidly 
with approximately 220 million visitors to National Forests and 
Grasslands and 65 million visitors to lands managed by the 
Bureau of Land Management. The Committee is concerned that the 
public have adequate access to these lands. Over a decade ago, 
a General Accounting Office (GAO) report found that over 50.4 
million acres of public lands administered by the Forest 
Service and Bureau of Land Management had inadequate access. 
The Committee is unaware of whether access to Federal public 
lands has improved or declined since the 1992 GAO report. 
Therefore, the Committee directs that by January 31, 2003, the 
Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management submit a report(s) 
that includes the number of acres under their jurisdiction that 
currently have inadequate public access by State, what steps 
have been taken or are currently underway to improve access, 
what actions are needed to improve access, and the extent to 
which a central repository of information exists for those 
lands with access problems.
    Trails.--The Committee recommends $70,779,000 for trails 
maintenance and capital improvement, $704,000 above the fiscal 
year 2002 level and $1,950,000 above the request. This fully 
funds the Administration's request for trails capital 
improvement and maintenance. The Committee expects that the 
National scenic and historic trails will have priority in 
funding allocations. Under the National forest system account 
specific directions are included for National scenic and 
historic trails operations.
    Conservation spending category.--The Committee has included 
$64,866,000 for the conservation spending category within the 
capital improvement and maintenance appropriation. This 
includes $50,866,000 for deferred maintenance as requested, a 
decrease of $10,134,000 from the enacted level.
    The Committee also has established a significant source of 
new funding to help remediate salmonid fish passage problems. 
This includes $14,000,000 under this heading for the Forest 
Service, and an additional $4,000,000 for the Bureau of Land 
Management and $2,000,000 for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service. The Committee conducted a hearing on this topic and 
remains concerned that older culverts are preventing fish 
passage to thousands of miles of upstream habitat that could be 
used by salmonid fish, including listed species. Culvert 
replacement is a very cost-effective way to increase habitat 
available to salmonid fish. The Committee directs the Forest 
Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the Fish and 
Wildlife Service to coordinate jointly a course of action and 
provide a report to the Committee within 90 days of enactment 
of this Act, describing how activities will be coordinated for 
the accelerated replacement of culverts blocking fish passage. 
This approach must at a minimum address the need for 
designation of a single lead agency for consultation on these 
fish passage projects, a process that ensures rapid completion 
of consultation on fish passage projects, and other methods to 
implement prompt accomplishments. The Federal agencies should 
consult and coordinate with States, watershed councils and 
others to help determine priority projects. The Committee 
expects that all projects will have appropriate and continual 
monitoring and subsequent evaluation so improvements can be 
implemented and the effectiveness of this effort and specific 
techniques determined. The Committee notes that this new 
funding is an addition to the base allocations for the 
agencies; at the hearing the Forest Service indicated that 
$65,000,000 of the budget request for roads, which the 
Committee has fully funded, would be to fund critical deferred 
maintenance. The base program, including funds from other 
sources such as the State payments bill, was estimated at 
$12,500,000 for Region 6 alone; the Forest Service should 
continue this effort and build on it with the new conservation 
spending category allocation.

                            LAND ACQUISITION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $149,742,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       130,510,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       146,336,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        -3,406,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +15,826,000


    The Committee recommends $146,336,000 for land acquisition, 
an increase of $15,826,000 above the request and $3,406,000 
below the enacted level. This amount includes $121,336,000 for 
line item projects, $15,000,000 for acquisition management, 
$1,500,000 for cash equalization, $2,000,000 for inholdings and 
$1,000,000 for wilderness.
    The land acquisition is funded under the conservation 
spending program.
    The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
funds:
                                                               Committee
        Area and State                                    recommendation
Apache--Sitgreaves NF (AZ)..............................      $1,500,000
Arapaho NF: Beaver Brook Watershed (CO).................       4,000,000
Beaverhead & Deerlodge NF's: Watershed, RY Timber (MT)..       5,000,000
Chattahoochee NF: Georgia Mountains (GA)................       3,200,000
Chequamegon & Nicolet NF's: Wisc. Wild Waterways (WI)...       3,000,000
Cherokee NF: Tennessee Mountains (TN)...................       4,400,000
Chippewa & S.NF: Minnesota Wilderness/Water/W'life (MN).       1,950,000
Cibola NF: La Madera (NM)...............................       3,800,000
Coconino NF: Sedona/Red Rocks (AZ)......................       2,500,000
Columbia River Gorge NSA (OR/WA)........................      10,000,000
Daniel Boone NF: Assorted Inholdings (KY)...............       3,500,000
Delta NF: Lower Yazoo (MS)..............................       2,000,000
DeSoto NF: Glen's Pond (MS).............................         150,000
Flathead NF: Swan Valley (MT)...........................       1,500,000
Florida National Scenic Trail (FL)......................       5,000,000
Francis Marion NF (SC)..................................       2,000,000
Green Mountain NF: Recreation & Water Enhancement (VT)..       1,750,000
Hoosier NF: Unique Areas (IN)...........................       1,500,000
Huron & Ottawa NF's: Great Lakes/Great Lands (MI).......       2,000,000
Los Padres NF: Big Sur Ecosystem (CA)...................       3,000,000
Mark Twain NF: Ozark Mtns. Stream and lake frontages 
    (MO)................................................       1,000,000
Midewin Tallgrass Prairie (IL)..........................         500,000
Monongahela NF (WV).....................................       4,000,000
Multiple NF's: Chattooga W&SR/Chattooga River (SC/GA/NC)       2,000,000
Multiple NF's: Greater Yellowstone Area (MT)............       9,630,000
Multiple NF's: I-90 Corridor/Plum Creek and Cascade 
    Conservation Partnership (WA).......................       4,500,000
Multiple NF's: Idaho Wilderness/W&S Rivers (ID/MT)......       1,700,000
Multiple NF's: Lewis & Clark Nat'l Historic Trail (ID/
    MT).................................................       1,000,000
Multiple NF's: Northwest Wild Scenic Rivers (OR/WA).....       2,500,000
Multiple NF's: Pacific Crest Trail (CA/OR/WA)...........       3,000,000
Multiple NF's: Pacific Northwest Streams (OR/WA)........       4,000,000
Osceola NF: Suwannee Wildlife Corridor--Pinhook (FL)....       2,000,000
Ozark--St. Francis: Arkansas Rivers and Streams (AR)....       3,000,000
San Bernardino NF (CA)..................................       3,500,000
Santa Fe NF: Gascon Point--Sawyer (NM)..................       5,500,000
Sawtooth NF: NRA Easement Program (ID)..................       3,000,000
Shoshone NF: Felts Parcel (WY)..........................         450,000
Tahoe NF: North Fork American River, (CA)...............       3,250,000
Uinta & Wasatch-Cache NF's: Bonneville Shoreline Trail 
    (UT)................................................       2,265,000
Uncompahgre & San Juan NF's: Red Mountain (CO)..........       5,000,000
Wasatch-Cache NF: High Uintas (UT)......................       2,540,000
Wayne NF: Select Lands (OH).............................         751,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal: Federal Acquisition projects............     126,836,000
Acquisition Management..................................      15,000,000
Inholdings/Exchanges....................................       2,000,000
Land Exchange Equalization Payment......................       1,500,000
Wilderness Protection...................................       1,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................    $146,336,000

         ACQUISITION OF LANDS FOR NATIONAL FORESTS SPECIAL ACTS




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $1,069,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         1,069,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         1,069,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $1,069,000 for acquisition of 
lands for National forests, special acts, as requested. These 
funds are used pursuant to several special acts, which 
authorize appropriations from the receipts of specified 
National forests for the purchase of lands to minimize erosion 
and flood damage to critical watersheds needing soil 
stabilization and vegetative cover.

            ACQUISITION OF LANDS TO COMPLETE LANDS EXCHANGES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................          $234,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................           234,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................           234,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $234,000 as requested for 
acquisition of lands to complete land exchanges under the Act 
of December 4, 1967 (16 U.S.C. 484a). Under the Act, deposits 
made by public school districts or public school authorities to 
provide for cash equalization of certain land exchanges can be 
appropriated to acquire similar lands suitable for National 
forest system purposes in the same State as the National 
forests lands conveyed in the exchanges.

                         RANGE BETTERMENT FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $3,290,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         3,402,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         3,402,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................          +112,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $3,402,000, as requested, for the 
range betterment fund, to be derived from grazing receipts from 
the National forests (Public Law 94-579, as amended) and to be 
used for range rehabilitation, protection, and improvements 
including seeding, reseeding, fence construction, weed control, 
water development, and fish and wildlife habitat enhancement in 
16 western States.

    GIFTS, DONATIONS AND BEQUESTS FOR FOREST AND RANGELAND RESEARCH




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................           $92,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................            92,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................            92,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $92,000, the budget estimate, for 
gifts, donations and bequests for forest and rangeland 
research. Authority for the program is contained in Public Law 
95-307 (16 U.S.C. 1643, section 4(b)). Amounts appropriated and 
not needed for current operations may be invested in public 
debt securities. Both the principal and earnings from the 
receipts are available to the Forest Service.

        MANAGEMENT OF NATIONAL FOREST LANDS FOR SUBSISTENCE USES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $5,488,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         5,542,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         5,542,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................           +54,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $5,542,000, as requested, for the 
management of national forest lands for subsistence uses in 
Alaska.

               ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS, FOREST SERVICE

    The Committee has retained administrative provisions 
contained in previous years. The Committee has provided for a 
program of $2,000,000 for the Youth Conservation Corps, funded 
through the conservation spending category. The Committee has 
also continued the authority for transfers to the National 
Forest Foundation (NFF) and the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation. The Committee is encouraged by these partnership 
efforts. The Committee is allowing $300,000 in administrative 
funds to be used by the National Forest Foundation for one more 
year despite the Administration's request to end this support. 
The Committee has also continued the wildland fire transfer 
authority, which allows use of funds from other accounts 
available to the Forest Service during wildfire emergencies 
when other wildfire emergency funds are not available. The 
Committee expects the Administration to promptly prepare 
supplemental budget requests when they transfer funds from 
other appropriations during wildfire emergencies. The Committee 
has not continued the special conveyance authority for the 
Green Mountain NF, VT but the authority for the Pinchot 
Institute for Conservation is extended for four years.
    The Committee notes the expected increases in indirect 
costs for the Forest Service despite the Administration's 
emphasis on streamlining agency operations and reducing such 
costs. While the Committee is skeptical that such costs can be 
reduced by 50 percent, as proposed by the Administration, it is 
imperative that substantial reductions occur in order to 
increase the availability of funds for on-the-ground work. 
Although the Committee has eliminated prescriptive bill 
language regarding management of indirect costs, the Committee 
directs the Forest Service to continue to display agency 
indirect costs in future budget justifications, continue its 
use of standard definitions for such costs, and report to the 
Committee any changes in such definitions. Further, the 
Committee directs that indirect expenses charged to the 
Knutson-Vandenberg, Brush Disposal, Cooperative Work-Other, and 
Salvage Sale funds shall be limited to no more than 20% of 
total obligations.
    The Committee notes the shortfalls in the Field Leadership 
Decisions Initiative (FLDI) on page 181 of the appendix to the 
Budget of the U.S. Government. Whereas the Committee supports 
some of the intent of this initiative, such as more funding to 
field units and additional outsourcing, as discussed in a 
hearing with the Chief of the Forest Service. The Committee 
recognizes that much of the specific details on page 181 are 
impractical. The Committee also disagrees with the large 
reductions in staffing promoted in this initiative for the next 
three years, reductions of 2500 persons per year. The Forest 
Service even proposed in its budget justification to take all 
1245 of its FTE reductions from the wildfire program; this is 
clearly unacceptable. The Committee directs the Forest Service 
to rework its approach and restructure the FLDI and come up 
with a meaningful proposal regarding staffing and indirect 
costs.

                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


                         CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY

                               (DEFERRAL)

    The Committee recommends the deferral of $50,000,000 in 
clean coal technology funding until fiscal year 2004. These 
funds are needed for the successful conclusion of existing 
clean coal projects but will not be required for obligation in 
fiscal year 2003.
    The Committee agrees that up to $14,000,000 in prior year 
funds may be used for administration of the clean coal 
technology program in fiscal year 2002. The Committee 
encourages the Department to budget for the administrative 
costs of the remaining clean coal projects together with the 
new clean coal power initiative in the fossil energy research 
and development account beginning in fiscal year 2004, and to 
keep these funds in the fossil energy base budget for future 
years.
    The Committee continues to support the U.S./China Energy 
and Environmental Center, which supports and assists the 
efforts of U.S. companies to promote the use of American clean 
energy technology in China. This technology will greatly reduce 
emissions and improve energy efficiency.

                 FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

    Fossil energy research and development programs make 
prudent investments in long-range research and development that 
help protect the environment through higher efficiency power 
generation, advanced technologies and improved compliance and 
stewardship operations. These activities safeguard our domestic 
energy security. This country will continue to rely on 
traditional fuels for the majority of its energy requirements 
for the foreseeable future, and the activities funded through 
this account ensure that energy technologies continue to 
improve with respect to emissions reductions and control and 
energy efficiency.
    Fossil fuels, especially coal, are this country's most 
abundant and lowest cost fuels for electric power generation. 
They are why this country enjoys the lowest cost electricity of 
any industrialized economy. The prospects for technology 
advances for coal and other fossil fuels are just as bright as 
those for alternative energy sources such as solar, wind and 
geothermal. The power generation technology research funded 
under this account has the goal of developing virtually 
pollution-free power plants within the next 15 or 20 years and 
doubling the amount of electricity produced from the same 
amount of fuel.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $582,790,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       489,305,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       664,205,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +81,415,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................      +174,900,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $664,205,000 for fossil energy 
research and development, an increase of $174,900,000 above the 
budget request and $82,415,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
level. The large increases are due, in part, to the fact that 
in fiscal year 2002 a portion of the funds for this program 
were derived by transfer of excess funds from the Clean Coal 
Technology account. In addition, prior year unobligated 
balances were used to offset partially 2002 requirements. The 
Administration proposed using clean coal funding and prior year 
funds again this year; however, excess funds are not available 
for transfer at this time. The Committee has recommended 
deferring $50,000,000 in Clean Coal Technology funding under 
that account.
    Changes to the budget request include an increase of 
$40,000,000 associated with the Committee's rejection of the 
proposal to transfer funds from the clean coal technology 
program and an increase of $14,000,000 associated with the 
Committee's rejection of the use of prior year balance, which 
also would have come from the clean coal technology program. 
Other changes to the budget request are as follows.
    Fuels and Power Systems.--The Committee recommends 
$281,700,000 for fuels and power systems including increases of 
$18,500,000 for central systems, $21,500,000 for distributed 
generation systems, $26,600,000 for fuels programs, and 
$2,000,000 for advanced research. There is also a decrease of 
$12,000,000 for sequestration research and development.
    Increases for central systems include $4,000,000 for 
innovations for existing plants and $14,500,000 for advanced 
systems of which $2,500,000 is to continue the ion transport 
membrane (ITM) oxygen project under the integrated gasification 
combined cycle activity and $6,000,000 is for other IGCC 
programs including Vision 21; $3,000,000 is for pressurized 
fluidized bed systems, which assumes a broadening and renaming 
of that program as described in the report language below; and 
$3,000,000 is for a direct fuel cell/turbine hybrid cost-shared 
project under the turbines/Vision 21 program.
    In distributed generation systems, increases include 
$2,000,000 for tubular solid oxide fuel cells under the fuel 
cells/Vision 21 hybrids program, $18,000,000 for the solid 
state energy conversion alliance under the fuel cells/
innovative concepts program, and $1,500,000 for ramjet 
technology under the novel generation program.
    In fuels programs, increases include $17,100,000 for 
transportation fuels and chemicals of which $2,100,000 is to 
continue the ITM syngas project and $15,000,000 to restore 
partially other programs; $6,000,000 for solid fuels and 
feedstocks of which $3,000,000 is for advanced separations 
technology and $3,000,000 is for cost-shared testing of 
byproducts from coal derived jet fuel; and $3,500,000 for 
advanced fuels research of which $1,500,000 is to continue the 
C-1 chemistry program and $2,000,000 is for sulfur tolerant 
catalysts and cleanup technology for coal use in fuel cells 
under the advanced concepts program.
    The increase in advanced research is to restore funding for 
the focus area on computational science under the technology 
crosscut program.
    Natural Gas Technologies.--The Committee recommends 
$48,190,000 for natural gas technologies, including increases 
of $6,700,000 for exploration and production, of which 
$3,700,000 is for advanced drilling, completion, and 
stimulation (including $1,500,000 for Deep Trek) and $3,000,000 
is to restore funding for the National Laboratory/industry 
partnership; $6,300,000 for gas hydrates, $10,000,000 for 
infrastructure (including $2,000,000 for storage technology), 
and $2,600,000 to complete the coal mine methane projects under 
the emerging processing technology program.
    Oil Technology.--The Committee recommends $54,900,000 for 
oil technology, including increases of $14,000,000 for 
exploration and production, $4,500,000 for reservoir life 
extension, and $1,000,000 for effective environmental 
protection.
    The increase for exploration includes $3,000,000 to restore 
funding for the National Laboratory/industry partnership, 
$2,000,000 for fundamental research/PRIME, and $9,000,000 to 
restore partially funding for other exploration and production 
research.
    In reservoir life extension there are increases of 
$5,000,000 for reservoir practices and technology transfer and 
$2,000,000 is for preferred upstream management practices. 
There is also a decrease of $2,500,000 for a minority education 
initiative.
    The increase for effective environmental protection 
partially restores funding for that program.
    Other.--The Committee recommends increases of $2,000,000 
for cooperative research and development and $500,000 for fixed 
costs in the import/export authorization program. The Committee 
also recommends an increase of $3,000,000 for contract services 
at the National Energy Technology Laboratory under the program 
direction budget activity. In general plant projects, increases 
include $1,000,000 for the Albany Research Center and 
$11,000,000 for funding the second year of a seven year 
renovation effort at the National Energy Technology Laboratory. 
An increase of $700,000 for fixed costs is recommended for the 
advanced metallurgical processes program at the Albany Research 
Center. There is also an increase of $1,000,000 to initiate an 
ongoing annual review of programs by the National Academy of 
Sciences. Finally, the Committee has not agreed to the use of 
$14,000,000 in prior year balances as explained above.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The $4,000,000 increase for central systems/innovations 
for existing plants should be focused in 3 areas: (1) 
developing data on mercury emissions from different types of 
coal power plants (as a function of different coal types and 
emissions control systems); (2) expanding mercury control 
research and development with emphasis on controlling mercury 
in plants burning lignite; and (3) evaluating the effect of 
increased mercury levels in coal power plant byproducts as a 
result of emissions control.
    2. The $6,000,000 increase for other IGCC (including Vision 
21) programs should be focused in 3 areas: (1) initiating 
research and development on IGCC gas separation for mercury 
removal; (2) conducting test runs on multiple coal types with 
air and with oxygen at the Wilsonville power systems 
development facility; and (3) pursuing research and development 
on IGCC sensors and controls.
    3. The pressurized fluidized bed program should be renamed 
and broadened to include atmospheric fluidized bed and other 
advanced systems.
    4. The carbon sequestration program should be more focused 
on carbon capture.
    5. The $9,000,000 increase for other exploration and 
production activities under the oil technology program should 
be directed toward technology improvements to address the 200 
billion barrels of oil that is not recoverable by conventional 
methods. Within this category pressure pulse technology for 
enhanced oil recovery should be considered.
    6. With respect to certain programs funded under the energy 
conservation account, the NETL should continue to be actively 
involved in the management of the industrial gasification 
program and in the mining industries of the future program. 
Also, the petroleum industries of the future program should be 
closely coordinated with the oil research and development 
programs funded under the fossil energy account.
    7. The cooperative programs with States and the energy 
efficiency science initiative--are continued in fiscal year 
2003 under the energy conservation appropriation. Half of the 
funding for the energy efficiency science initiative is managed 
by fossil energy, as legislated in the fiscal year 2002 
Interior and Related Appropriations Act. Projects under the 
cooperative programs with the States should also be coordinated 
closely with the fossil energy programs so that the highest 
priority energy research projects are funded. This same 
direction applies to the reciprocating engines programs.
    8. The Assistant Secretaries for Fossil Energy and Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy are directed to modify their 
current procurement practice to allow full and open competition 
to occur, when appropriate. This more flexible, pragmatic, and 
fully responsible approach will achieve technical integrity and 
improve funding efficiencies while maintaining realistic small 
and minority business goals.
    9. The Department should not withhold program funds 
appropriated by the Congress without justifying such 
withholdings in advance and in writing to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations.
    10. The $1,000,000 for the National Academy of Sciences 
review of programs should remain in the base for a continuing 
annual review by the Academy of programs, using the Academy's 
matrix, to measure the relative benefits expected to be 
achieved and to inform decision making on what programs should 
be continued, expanded, scaled-back, or eliminated.

                 NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES

    The Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves are managed by 
the Department of Energy to achieve the greatest value and 
benefit to the Government. In fiscal year 1998, NPR-1 (Elk 
Hills) was sold as mandated by the National Defense 
Authorization Act for fiscal year 1996. That Act also directed 
the Department to conduct a study of the remaining properties--
3 Naval Oil Shale Reserves and NPR-2 and NPR-3. The National 
Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1998 directed the 
transfer of two of the oil shale reserves (NOSR-1 and NOSR-3) 
to the Department of the Interior. On January 14, 2000, the 
Department announced it would return a portion of the NOSR-2 
property in Utah to the Ute Indian Tribe. Two properties remain 
under the jurisdiction of the Department of Energy. They are 
NPR-2 in Kern County, CA and NPR-3 in Natrona County, WY. The 
DOE continues to be responsible for routine operation and 
maintenance of NPR-3, management of the Rocky Mountain Oilfield 
Testing Center at NPR-3, lease management at NPR-2, and 
continuing environmental and remediation work at Elk Hills. For 
several years after the sale of Elk Hills, these programs were 
operated largely with prior year unobligated balances. Those 
balances were mostly exhausted by fiscal year 2002 and 
appropriations to the account were restored in that year.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $17,371,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        20,831,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        20,831,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +3,460,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $20,831,000 for the operation of 
the naval petroleum and oil shale reserves, which is equal to 
the budget request.

                      ELK HILLS SCHOOL LANDS FUND

    Payment to the Elk Hills school lands fund was part of the 
settlement associated with the sale of Naval Petroleum Reserve 
Numbered 1. Under the settlement, payments to the fund are to 
be made over a period of seven years.
    The Committee recommends $36,000,000 for the Elk Hills 
school lands fund, which is equal to amount available for 
fiscal year 2002. The Committee recommends that these funds be 
made available on October 1, 2003, rather than on October 1, 
2002 as proposed in the budget. The Committee's recommendation 
is consistent with the payment of these funds in each of the 
past few years. This represents the fifth of seven payments to 
the fund, which was established as a part of the sale of the 
Elk Hills Naval Petroleum Reserve in California (to settle 
school lands claims by the State).

                          Energy Conservation

    The energy conservation program of the Department of Energy 
conducts cooperative research and development projects aimed at 
sustaining economic growth through more efficient energy use. 
Activities financed through this program focus on improving 
existing technologies and developing new technologies related 
to residential, commercial, industrial and transportation 
energy use. In fiscal year 2001, funds and programs were 
transferred from the building sector and industry sector 
research activities to establish a new distributed generation 
activity that addresses critical energy needs for next 
generation clean, efficient, fuel flexible technologies for 
industrial, commercial and institutional applications. These 
technologies use the waste heat energy rejected during 
electricity generation from microturbines, reciprocating 
engines, and fuel cells in the form of cooling, heating and 
power. This waste heat utilization is referred to as ``combined 
heat and power''. Also funded under the energy conservation 
heading are the Federal energy management program, which 
focuses on improving energy efficiency in Federal buildings, 
the low-income weatherization assistance program, and State 
energy program grants.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $912,805,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       901,651,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       984,653,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +71,848,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +83,002,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $984,653,000 for energy 
conservation, an increase of $83,002,000 above the budget 
request and $71,848,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. 
Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
    Building Technology, State and Community Sector.--The 
Committee recommends $402,293,000 for building technology, 
State and community sector research, including increases of 
$6,700,000 for building research and standards, $2,000,000 for 
cooperative programs with the States, $4,000,000 for the energy 
efficiency science initiative, and $700,000 for management and 
planning. There is also a decrease of $19,898,000 for building 
technology assistance.
    In building research and standards/equipment materials and 
tools, there are increases of $2,700,000 for space conditioning 
and refrigeration and $4,700,000 for building envelope programs 
of which $1,700,000 is for thermal insulation and building 
materials, $2,500,000 is for electrochromics in the windows 
technologies program, and $500,000 is for the National 
Fenestration Rating Council database, also in the windows 
program. There is also a decrease of $700,000 for technical/
program management support.
    In building technology assistance, there is a decrease of 
$27,100,000 for the weatherization assistance program, which 
leaves an increase of $20,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 
level. The Committee also recommends an increase of $11,202,000 
for State energy programs ($5,000,000 above the 2002 level) 
and, in community energy programs, decreases of $1,000,000 for 
Rebuild America and $3,000,000 for Energy Star.
    The increases for cooperative programs with the States and 
for the energy efficiency science initiative restore funding 
for those programs to the 2002 level.
    The increase for management and planning partially restores 
funding for program direction.
    The increase of $1,000,000 to initiate an ongoing annual 
review of programs by the National Academy of Sciences is a 
follow-up to the Academy's report on measuring the success of 
energy research.
    Federal Energy Management Program.--The Committee 
recommends $24,880,000 for the Federal energy management 
program, which is a decrease of $3,000,000 below the budget 
request for program activities.
    Industry Sector.--The Committee recommends $159,859,000 for 
industry sector research, including increases of $6,000,000 for 
industries of the future (specific), $10,000,000 for industries 
of the future (crosscutting), $4,000,000 for the energy 
efficiency science initiative, and $1,500,000 for management 
and planning.
    In industries of the future (specific), increases include 
$3,000,000 for petroleum refining to continue existing projects 
and to start small refiner projects (as directed last year), 
$2,000,000 for regional bio-based consortia under the 
agriculture program, and, $1,000,000 for mining.
    In industries of the future (crosscutting), increases 
include $1,000,000 for materials research, $4,000,000 for 
combustion systems to continue two of the three contracts under 
the industrial gasification program, $2,000,000 for sensors and 
controls for robotics/repetitive systems technology, $2,000,000 
for inventions and innovations to restore the 2002 level, and 
$1,000,000 for technical assistance/best practices.
    The increase for the energy efficiency science initiative 
restores that program to the 2002 level. The Committee commends 
the Office of Industrial Technologies for continuing the 
cooperative program with the States in the budget request.
    The increase for management and planning is to restore 
partially program direction funding.
    Power Technologies/Distributed Generation Technologies.--
The Committee recommends $79,704,000 for distributed generation 
technologies including increases of $15,500,000 for distributed 
energy resources and $300,000 for management and planning.
    In distributed energy resources, increases include 
$4,000,000 for microturbines, $3,000,000 for reciprocating 
engines, $2,000,000 for advanced materials and sensors for 
power electronics to enhance the cost effectiveness of 
distributed generation, $500,000 for oil heat research in the 
fuel flexibility program, $3,000,000 for thermally activated 
technologies, and $3,000,000 for applications integration.
    In management and planning, increases include $200,000 to 
restore partially the evaluation and planning program and 
$100,000 to restore partially program direction funding.
    Transportation Sector.--The Committee recommends 
$273,864,000 for transportation sector research, including 
increases of $30,500,000 for vehicle technology research and 
development, $3,700,000 for fuels utilization, $9,100,000 for 
materials technology, $1,600,000 for technology deployment, 
$2,000,000 for cooperative programs with States, $4,000,000 for 
the energy efficiency science initiative, and $300,000 for 
management and planning.
    In vehicle technology, increases include $4,000,000 for 
heavy vehicle propulsion in the hybrid program, $2,000,000 in 
fuel cell research/stack subsystem components for research on a 
substitute for platinum in catalysts, $2,000,000 for advanced 
battery development in the electric vehicles program, 
$3,000,000 for heavy vehicle systems optimization, and 
$19,500,000 for advanced combustion systems as follows. The 
advanced combustion systems increase includes $6,000,000 for 
combustion and emissions control, $3,000,000 for light truck 
engines, $6,000,000 for heavy truck engines, and $4,500,000 for 
off highway engines of which $1,000,000 is for railroad/
locomotives research, $1,500,000 is for fuel cell applications 
for off road vehicles, and $2,000,000 is for emissions 
reductions research.
    In fuels utilization, increases include $1,000,000 for 
medium trucks, $1,000,000 for heavy trucks, and $1,700,000 for 
fueling infrastructure, all in the alternative fuels program.
    In materials technology, increases include $500,000 for 
automotive propulsion materials, $7,000,000 for lightweight 
materials technologies, and $1,600,000 for the high temperature 
materials laboratory.
    In technology deployment, there is an increase of 
$3,000,000 for the clean cities program and decreases of 
$500,000 for testing and evaluation, $800,000 for EPACT 
replacement fuels, and $100,000 for advanced vehicle 
competitions.
    The increases for the cooperative programs with the States 
and the energy efficiency science initiative restore those 
programs to the 2002 level.
    The increase for management and planning is to restore 
partially program direction funding.
    Other.--The Committee recommends an increase of $3,000,000 
in policy and management to restore partially funding for the 
regional support offices. There is also an increase of 
$1,000,000 to initiate an ongoing annual review of programs by 
the National Academy of Sciences, which follows up on the 
Academy's report on measuring success of energy research.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Department should notify the Committee in the fiscal 
year 2004 budget submission on economies and efficiencies 
realized through the recent reorganization of the Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy organization. For example, the 
Committee expects that several positions can be eliminated as a 
result of the consolidation of budget and administration 
functions.
    2. The cooperative programs with the States and the energy 
efficiency science initiative should be closely coordinated 
with the Fossil Energy Research and Development program to 
ensure the highest priority research needs across both the 
Fossil Energy and Energy Conservation accounts are addressed. 
Half of the funding for the energy efficiency science 
initiative is to be managed by fossil energy as legislated in 
the Interior Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2002. The 
mining industry of the future program, the petroleum industry 
of the future program, the industrial gasification program, and 
the reciprocating engines program should also be coordinated 
closely with fossil energy.
    3. The Department should report to the Committee by 
December 1, 2002, on what it is doing to implement the next 
generation lighting initiative using funds appropriated for 
fiscal year 2003. Funding for this initiative should be 
identified in the fiscal year 2004 and subsequent budget 
submissions.
    4. The Rebuild America program should be restructured to a 
small number of manageable consortia rather than hundreds of 
directly reporting individual programs. The regional support 
offices should assist with the restructuring and help manage 
the program.
    5. The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings 
and positive environmental benefits achieved by the military 
through the implementation of pulse technology as a major 
component of its battery management programs. The Committee 
believes that the Department of Energy would also benefit 
significantly and directly from the use of this technology to 
extend the life of vehicle batteries. These benefits include 
savings in battery replacement costs, reduction in overall 
maintenance costs for vehicles and ancillary equipment, and a 
resultant increase in safety for personnel. The Committee urges 
the Department to incorporate this technology in its ongoing 
purchase and maintenance programs for vehicles. The Department 
should report to the Committee by December 31, 2002, on its 
plans to comply with this direction. Beginning with the fiscal 
year 2004 budget request, the budget submission should include 
an accounting of the extent to which battery pulse technology 
is being employed and the savings expected and realized as a 
result of the use of this technology. The Department should 
also, through the Federal Energy Management Program, encourage 
the use of this technology throughout the Federal government.
    6. The funding for regional biobased products consortia in 
the agriculture industry of the future program is to accelerate 
the development of the bioproducts industry. The goal of this 
new, competitive, cost-shared program is for each consortium to 
become self-supporting.
    7. The Department should promote the development of metrics 
that are helpful in tracking improvements in energy and 
material usage, pollutant and greenhouse gas generation, and 
water use for energy intensive industries, and for 
disseminating the resulting lessons learned.
    8. The $3,000,000 increase in distributed energy systems 
for applications integration should focus on projects in 2 
areas: (1) high technology industries like telecommunications 
and (2) development and deployment of distributed energy 
resources architecture, engineering, and design to reduce the 
risks and costs associated with on site generation.
    9. The Northwest Alliance for Transportation Technologies 
should be expanded to support the continued development of 
essential power systems and advanced emissions technologies for 
light duty and heavy duty vehicles.
    10. In the fiscal year 2004 budget, the Department should 
consider increasing the engine boosting technology activity 
funding in the vehicle technology program in order to explore 
engine downsizing opportunities and resulting efficiencies 
through the use of turbo chargers.
    11. The $3,000,000 increase in vehicle technologies for 
heavy vehicle systems optimization should focus on technologies 
in two areas: (1) anti idling and (2) aerodynamic drag.
    12. The Assistant Secretaries for Fossil Energy and Energy 
Efficiency and Renewable Energy are directed to modify their 
current procurement practice to allow full and open competition 
to occur, when appropriate. This more flexible, pragmatic, and 
fully responsible approach will achieve technical integrity and 
improve funding efficiencies while maintaining realistic small 
and minority business goals.
    13. The Department should not withhold program funds 
appropriated by the Congress without justifying such 
withholdings in advance and in writing to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations.
    14. The $1,000,000 for the National Academy of Sciences 
review of programs should remain in the base for a continuing 
annual review by the Academy of programs, using the Academy's 
matrix, to measure the relative benefits expected to be 
achieved and to inform decision making on what programs should 
be continued, expanded, scaled-back, or eliminated.

                          ECONOMIC REGULATION

    The economic regulation account funds the independent 
Office of Hearings and Appeals, which is responsible for all of 
the Department's adjudication processes except those that are 
the responsibility of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 
The amount funded by this Committee is for those activities 
specific to this bill: mainly those related to petroleum 
overcharge cases. All other activities are funded on a 
reimbursable basis from the other elements of the Department of 
Energy. Prior to fiscal year 1997, this account also funded the 
Economic Regulatory Administration.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $1,996,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         1,487,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         1,487,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................          -509,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $1,487,000 for economic 
regulation, equal to the budget request and $509,000 below the 
2002 level. The Committee expects the Department to phase out 
direct funding for the Office of Hearings and Appeals from the 
Interior bill over the next two years. The Committee continues 
to be concerned about the high cost of employees in this office 
and concerned that the casework, funded by the Interior and 
related agencies appropriation, has not been brought to a 
timely completion.

                      STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

    The Strategic Petroleum Reserve was created by the Energy 
Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 to provide the United 
States with adequate strategic and economic protection against 
disruptions in oil supplies. The SPR program was established as 
a 750 million-barrel capacity crude oil reserve with storage in 
large underground salt caverns at five sites in the Gulf Coast 
area. It is connected to major private sector distribution 
systems and maintained to achieve full drawdown rate capability 
within fifteen days of notice to proceed with drawdown. Storage 
capacity development was completed in September 1991, providing 
the capability to store 750 million barrels of crude oil in 
underground caverns and to be ready to deploy at the 
President's direction in the event of an emergency. As a result 
of the decommissioning of the Weeks Island site in 1999, the 
Reserve lost 70 million barrels of capacity. However, the 
Department has reassessed the capacities of the remaining 
storage sites and estimates those sites are currently capable 
of storing a total of 700 million barrels. During 1998, an 
inventory of 561 million barrels provided 60 days of net import 
protection. In 2002, 600 million barrels provide 54 days of net 
import protection. The decline in days of net import protection 
is the result of the growth of U.S. requirements for imported 
crude oil and the reduction in U.S. domestic oil production.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $179,009,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       168,856,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       175,856,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        -3,153,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +7,000,000


    The Committee recommends $175,856,000 for operation of the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve, an increase of $7,000,000 above 
the budget request and $3,153,000 below the fiscal year 2002 
level. Changes to the budget request include increases of 
$4,000,000 in storage development and operations, which has 
been transferred from the SPR petroleum account budget to pay 
for electricity costs associated with oil injection, and 
$3,000,000 in management to restore funding to the 2002 level.

                         SPR PETROLEUM ACCOUNT

    The SPR Petroleum Account was established to fund petroleum 
inventory acquisitions, associated transportation costs, U.S. 
Customs duties, terminal throughput charges, incremental 
drawdown costs and other related costs associated with filling 
the SPR.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................                $0
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        11,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         7,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +7,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        -4,000,000


    The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for the SPR petroleum 
account, a decrease of $4,000,000 below the budget request and 
an increase of $7,000,000 above the 2002 level. The decrease to 
the budget request reflects the transfer of $4,000,000 to the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve account to cover the electricity 
costs associated with oil injection. The funding provided in 
this account for fiscal year 2003 will complete the existing 
royalty in kind program and support the filling of the SPR to 
its 700 million barrel capacity.

                   NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE

    The acquisition and storage of heating oil for the 
Northeast began in August 2000 when the Department of Energy, 
through the Strategic Petroleum Reserve account, awarded 
contracts for the lease of commercial storage facilities and 
acquisition of heating oil. The purpose of the reserve is to 
assure home heating oil supplies for the Northeast States 
during times of very low inventories and significant threats to 
immediate supply of heating oil. The Northeast Home Heating Oil 
Reserve was established as a separate entity from the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve on March 6, 2001. The 2,000,000 barrel 
reserve is stored in commercial facilities in New York Harbor, 
Rhode Island, and New Haven, Connecticut.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................                $0
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         8,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         8,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +8,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $8,000,000 for the Northeast home 
heating oil reserve, equal to the budget request and $8,000,000 
above the fiscal year 2002 level. The program formerly was 
funded as part of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve account.

                   ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION

    The Energy Information Administration is a quasi-
independent agency within the Department of Energy established 
to provide timely, objective, and accurate energy-related 
information to the Congress, executive branch, State 
governments, industry, and the public. The information and 
analysis prepared by the EIA is widely disseminated and the 
agency is recognized as an unbiased source of energy 
information by government organizations, industry, professional 
statistical organizations and the public.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $78,499,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        80,111,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        80,611,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +2,112,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................          +500,000


    The Committee recommends $80,611,000 for the Energy 
Information Administration, an increase of $500,000 above the 
budget request and $2,112,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. 
The increase above the request is for essential coal data 
system improvements.

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


                         Indian Health Service


                         INDIAN HEALTH SERVICES

    The provision of Federal health services to Indians is 
based on a special relationship between Indian tribes and the 
U.S. Government first set forth in the 1830s by the U.S. 
Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall. Numerous 
treaties, statutes, constitutional provisions, and 
international law have reconfirmed this relationship. Principal 
among these is the Snyder Act of 1921, which provides the basic 
authority for most Indian health services provided by the 
Federal Government to American Indians and Alaska Natives. The 
Indian Health Service (IHS) provides direct health care 
services in 36 hospitals, 58 health centers, 4 school health 
centers, and 44 health stations. Tribes and tribal groups, 
through contracts with the IHS, operate 13 hospitals, 161 
health centers, 3 school health centers, and 249 health 
stations (including 170 Alaska Native village clinics). The 
IHS, tribes and tribal groups also operate 11 regional youth 
substance abuse treatment centers and 2,252 units of staff 
quarters.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................    $2,389,614,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................     2,453,835,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................     2,508,756,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................      +119,142,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +54,921,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $2,508,756,000 for Indian health 
services, an increase of $54,921,000 above the budget request 
and $119,142,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. Changes to 
the budget request are discussed below.
    Hospital and clinic programs are increased by $36,000,000, 
including $33,000,000 for the Indian health care improvement 
fund and $3,000,000 for the Lawton, OK hospital. Dental health 
programs are increased by $200,000 to fund the increased use of 
volunteer dentists. Contract health services are increased by 
$15,000,000 to address the large unmet need for contract 
services. Direct operations are increased by $822,000 to 
address administrative shortfalls at Headquarters and Area 
Offices. Self-governance is decreased by $9,000,000, which 
leaves sufficient funds for the staffing and operational 
expenses of the 8 FTEs in that office. An increase of 
$11,899,000 is provided to cover the cost of health care for 
Public Health Service annuitants. These costs were previously 
paid by the Department of Defense.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Lawton, OK hospital was constructed in the 1960s 
with Federal funds but never received any additional funds for 
staffing of new facilities. The situation has reached a crisis 
level with IHS needing to reprogram funds to keep the hospital 
operating in each of the last few years. This situation is 
unique to the Lawton hospital. These funds should remain in the 
base to cover ongoing operational needs at the hospital. If 
additional funds are required, they should be justified in the 
2004 budget submission.
    2. Funding for the Indian health care improvement fund is 
limited to the 55 most underfunded units. According to the IHS, 
this is the amount needed to bring those units up to 40 percent 
of needed funding.
    3. There have been no new self-governance compacts recently 
and therefore funds can be shifted from the self-governance 
account to other underfunded programs. This should not impact 
existing compacts because the funds in this account were 
intended for shortfall costs associated with new compacts. 
After compacts are operational, costs should be funded from 
health program funds.
    4. Funds for the pharmacy residency program remain in the 
base for fiscal year 2003.
    5. The fiscal year 2001 direction on the use of loan 
repayment program funding should continue to be followed in 
fiscal year 2003.
    6. The budget increase of $4,000,000 for recruiting health 
professionals should not be limited to former military and 
Department of Veteran Affairs health professionals. The IHS 
should pursue those recruitment possibilities as part of its 
overall recruitment program but, given the great need for 
health professionals, it should not set aside a specific amount 
of money for any particular population segment of the 
recruitment pool.
    7. IHS needs to reexamine its estimates of administrative 
costs for operation of Federally-run health programs and its 
estimates of residual costs for operation of inherently Federal 
functions at Headquarters and Area Offices and request 
increases for direct operations as needed in the fiscal year 
2004 budget.
    Bill language is recommended, under Title III--General 
Provisions, providing for a demonstration program for the 
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe in South Dakota. The tribe has 
reported that, by offering bonus payments to health 
professionals, it will be able to hire full time personnel at 
less cost than paying for part time contract health services. 
The Committee expects the Service to implement this 
demonstration program within 30 days of enactment of this Act; 
to monitor the program closely; and report to the Committee by 
April 1, 2003, with an evaluation of the program and 
recommendations on whether or not it should be extended in 
fiscal year 2004.

                        INDIAN HEALTH FACILITIES

    The need for new Indian health care facilities has not been 
fully quantified but it is safe to say that many billions of 
dollars would be required to renovate existing facilities and 
construct all the needed new hospitals and clinics. Safe and 
sanitary water and sewer systems for existing homes and solid 
waste disposal needs currently are estimated to amount to over 
$876 million for those projects that are considered to be 
economically feasible.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $369,487,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       362,571,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       391,865,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +22,378,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................       +29,294,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $391,865,000 for Indian health 
facilities, an increase of $29,294,000 above the budget request 
and $22,378,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. Changes to 
the budget request include $5,000,000 for maintenance and 
improvement, $2,000,000 for equipment and $22,294,000 for 
hospital and clinic construction, including $1,994,000 to 
complete the Pawnee, OK clinic, $3,000,000 for the Sisseton, SD 
clinic infrastructure, $1,300,000 for design of the Clinton, OK 
clinic; $5,000,000 for phase III of the Bethel, AK clinic staff 
quarters, $1,000,000 to restore funding for dental units, and 
$10,000,000 for small ambulatory care facilities.
    The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
hospital and clinic construction funds:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                     Committee
                             Project                               2003 request   recommendation    Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fort Defiance, AZ hospital......................................     $20,400,000     $20,400,000  ..............
Winnebago, NE hospital..........................................       8,241,000       8,241,000  ..............
Pinon, AZ clinic................................................      13,900,000      13,900,000  ..............
Red Mesa, AZ clinic.............................................       7,653,000       7,653,000  ..............
Pawnee, OK clinic...............................................      10,639,000      12,633,000       1,994,000
St. Paul, AK clinic.............................................      11,167,000      11,167,000  ..............
Sisseton, SD clinic.............................................  ..............       3,000,000       3,000,000
Clinton, OK clinic..............................................  ..............       1,300,000       1,300,000
Bethel, AK staff quarters.......................................  ..............       5,000,000       5,000,000
Small ambulatory facilities.....................................  ..............      10,000,000      10,000,000
Dental units....................................................  ..............       1,000,000       1,000,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................      72,000,000      94,294,000      22,294,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The maintenance program funding increase needs to remain 
in the base budget for 2004 and beyond. Further increases will 
be necessary as existing facilities get older and as more 
hospitals and clinics are built and expanded.
    2. The increase for equipment should be focused on 
replacing outdated analog medical devices with digital medical 
devices and telemedicine equipment and should remain in the 
base budget. Further increases will be necessary as existing 
equipment becomes outdated and as more hospitals and clinics 
are built and expanded.
    3. The Service should continue to work on needed 
improvements to the facilities priority system so that the full 
range of need for facilities in Indian country is given 
appropriate consideration.
    4. The methodology used to distribute facilities funding 
should address the fluctuating annual workload and maintain 
parity among IHS areas and tribes as the workload shifts.
    5. Funds for sanitation facilities for new and renovated 
housing should be used to serve housing provided by the Bureau 
of Indian Affairs Housing Improvement Program, new homes and 
homes renovated to like-new condition. Onsite sanitation 
facilities may also be provided for homes occupied by the 
disabled or sick who have physician referrals indicating an 
immediate medical need for adequate sanitation facilities at 
home.
    6. Sanitation funds should not be used to provide 
sanitation facilities for new homes funded by the housing 
programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 
The HUD should provide any needed funds to the IHS for that 
purpose.
    7. The IHS may use up to $5,000,000 in sanitation funding 
for projects to clean up and replace open dumps on Indian lands 
pursuant to the Indian Lands Open Dump Cleanup Act of 1994.
    Bill language is included to continue the Bethel, AK staff 
quarters project. Fiscal year 2003 is the third year of a four 
year commitment to this construction project.

                         OTHER RELATED AGENCIES


              Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    The dispute between the Hopi and Navajo tribes is 
centuries-old. The Hopi trace their origin on the the land back 
to the Anasazi race whose presence is recorded back to 1150 
A.D. Later in the 16th century Navajo settlement led to the 
isolation of the Hopi Reservation as an island within the area 
occupied by the Navajo reservation. In 1882, President Arthur 
issued an Executive Order which granted the Hopi a 2.5 million 
acre reservation to be occupied by the Hopi and such other 
Indians as the Secretary of the Interior saw fit to resettle 
there. Intertribal problems arose between the Navajo tribe and 
the Hopi tribe revolving around the question of the ownership 
of the land as well as cultural differences between the two 
tribes. Efforts to resolve these conflicts were not successful 
and led Congress to pass legislation in 1958 which authorized a 
lawsuit to determine ownership of the land. When attempts at 
mediation of the dispute as specified in an Act passed in 1974 
failed, the district court in Arizona partitioned the Joint Use 
Area equally between the Navajo and Hopi tribes under a decree 
that has required the relocation of members of both tribes. 
Most of those to be relocated are Navajo living on the Hopi 
Partitioned Land.
    At this time approximately 233 households remain be 
relocated, of which 24 are full-time residents on the Hopi 
Partitioned Land. A total of 3,269 families have been relocated 
from the Hopi Partitioned Land.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $15,148,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        14,491,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        14,491,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................              -657
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $14,491,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation, 
the same as the budget request and $657,000 below the 2002 
enacted level.

    Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts 
                              Development


                        PAYMENT TO THE INSTITUTE




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $4,490,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         5,130,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         5,130,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................              +640
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $5,130,000 for the Institute of 
American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development, 
the same as the budget request and $640,000 above the 2002 
enacted level.

                        Smithsonian Institution

    The Smithsonian Institution is unique in the Federal 
establishment. Established by the Congress in 1846 to carry out 
the trust included in James Smithson's will, it has been 
engaged for over 150 years in the ``increase and diffusion of 
knowledge among men'' in accordance with the donor's 
instructions. For some years, it used only the funds made 
available by the trust. Then, before the turn of the century, 
it began to receive Federal appropriations to conduct some of 
its activities. With the expenditure of both private and 
Federal funds over the years, it has grown into one of the 
world's great scientific, cultural, and intellectual 
organizations. It operates magnificent museums, outstanding art 
galleries, and important research centers. Its collections are 
among the best in the world. Its traveling exhibits bring 
beauty and information throughout the country.
    The Smithsonian attracted approximately 33,650,000 visitors 
in 2001 to its museums, galleries, and zoological park. 
Additional millions also view Smithsonian traveling 
exhibitions, which appear across the United States and abroad, 
and the annual Folklife Festival. As custodian of the National 
Collections, the Smithsonian is responsible for more than 140 
million art objects, natural history specimens, and artifacts. 
These collections are displayed for the enjoyment and education 
of visitors and are available for research by the staff of the 
Institution and by hundreds of visiting students, scientists, 
and historians each year. Other significant study efforts draw 
their data and results directly from terrestrial, marine, and 
astrophysical observations at various Smithsonian 
installations.
    The Smithsonian complex presently consists of 15 exhibition 
buildings in Washington, DC and New York City in the fields of 
science, history, technology and art; a zoological park in 
Washington, DC and an animal conservation and research center 
in Front Royal, Virginia; the Anacostia Museum, which performs 
research and exhibit activities in the District of Columbia; a 
preservation, storage and air and spacecraft display facility 
in Suitland, Maryland; a natural preserve in Panama and one on 
the Chesapeake Bay; an oceanographic research facility in Fort 
Pierce, Florida; astrophysical stations in Cambridge, 
Massachusetts and Mt. Hopkins, Arizona and elsewhere; and 
supporting administrative, laboratory, and storage areas.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $420,960,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       434,660,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       436,660,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +15,700,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        +2,000,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $436,660,000 for salaries and 
expenses, $2,000,000 above the budget request and $15,700,000 
above the enacted level. The fiscal year 2003 request contains 
$11,000,000 in salaries and expenses and $2,000,000 in the 
construction account for security needs. The Committee has 
provided the $11,000,000 and moved the $2,000,000 from the 
construction request into the salaries and expenses account to 
be allocated in the following manner: $400,000 for the farm 
exhibit at the National Zoological Park, $750,000 to expand the 
current research at STRI on microorganisms in tropical forests 
and soils, and $11,850,000 to relieve operational shortfalls.
    The Committee recommends that the Smithsonian Institution 
continue to assist other professional organizations in their 
efforts to create museum exhibits commemorating and celebrating 
the various aspects and impacts of the Louisiana Purchase and 
its bicentennial on April 30, 2003.
    The Committee is concerned by recent controversial 
agreements between the Smithsonian Institution and certain 
benefactors which appear to cede undue control over Smithsonian 
exhibits to both corporate and individual donors. While it 
lauds the philanthropic intentions of these donors, it is 
concerned that a dominantly publicly funded organization must 
not compromise its duty to its core missions of education and 
research when seeking private sponsorships. While the Committee 
does not have enough information to render judgment on each of 
these public controversies, it considers the recent agreement 
to remove the name of Samuel P. Langley from the main theater 
complex of the National Air and Space Museum and replace it 
with that of a corporate sponsor to be particularly 
incomprehensible. Samuel Langley was a noted aviation pioneer 
and the Smithsonian's third Secretary. No amount of money would 
seem adequate to justify denying him the recognition which he 
has enjoyed since the early 1980's when the much visited 
theater was named in his honor. Unfortunately, while this case 
seems particularly difficult to understand, it is by no means 
the only such controversy and confidence in the Smithsonian by 
many Members of Congress and by the general public has been 
shaken by what some see as the selling of the institution to 
the highest bidder. In response to these concerns the Committee 
requests that the Regents undertake the following actions:
    1. Institute a procedure so that all benefactor or gift 
agreements which include stipulations or specific requirements 
with respect to the design of exhibits or naming of facilities 
or parts of facilities are approved by formal vote of the 
Regents in open sessions rather than through the current 
process of preliminary approval by the Secretary and the 
Executive Committee with ratification by the full Regents.
    2. Direct the Secretary to reopen negotiations with the 
donor corporation regarding the naming of the IMAX theatre at 
the National Air and Space Museum with the goal of returning 
the name of Samuel P. Langley to this complex. The Committee 
notes that this would not preclude recognition of the 
corporation for its generosity in some other way at the theater 
complex. The Committee notes that in making this request, it 
does not mean to imply opposition to appropriate recognition of 
donors through naming opportunities as a general principal, but 
believes this particular action should be reconsidered.
    3. Carry out a review of the Smithsonian's policies 
regarding benefactor agreements and their applications in major 
gifts during the last 2 years and submit to the Committee not 
later than February 1, 2003 a report of the Regents of their 
findings.
    The Committee is very concerned by the information on 
executive compensation at the Smithsonian provided to the 
Committee as part of the fiscal year 2003 hearings process. 
This data indicated that last year, a year in which the 
Smithsonian leadership was aggressively complaining about 
shortages of funds for critical maintenance problems, that it 
approved an increase in compensation for the Secretary of the 
Smithsonian of almost 50 percent to a level this year of more 
than $588,000 including a contractual bonus of $85,000. The 
Committee was further disturbed to learn that the Smithsonian, 
a taxpayer financed philanthropic and educational organization, 
pays 29 employees salaries in excess of those paid to cabinet 
officers of the U.S. Government. While the Committee recognizes 
the right under its charter for the Smithsonian to pay 
employees at any level with trust funds donated to it by the 
public, it is concerned that increases in executive 
compensation of this magnitude can weaken the public's belief 
that the organization has justified its need for increased 
taxpayer support for its priority investments. The Regents are 
requested to carry-out a review of the Institution's executive 
compensation policies and report to the Committee prior to 
February 1, 2003 the results of this review.

            REPAIR, RESTORATION AND ALTERATION OF FACILITIES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $67,900,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        81,300,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        81,300,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       +13,400,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $81,300,000 for repair, 
restoration and alterations of facilities, the same as the 
budget request and $13,400,000 above the enacted level.
    The Committee urges the Secretary of the Smithsonian 
Institution to repair and restore the Jacksonville Bandstand, 
which is currently located next to the National Museum of 
American History.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        12,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        10,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................       -20,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................        -2,000,000


    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for construction of 
the National Museum of the American Indian, $2,000,000 below 
the budget request (as explained in the previous account) and 
$20,000,000 below the enacted level.

                        National Gallery of Art

    The National Gallery of Art is one of the world's great 
galleries. Its magnificent works of art are displayed for the 
benefit of millions of visitors from across this Nation and 
from other nations. The National Gallery of Art serves as an 
example of a successful cooperative endeavor between private 
individuals and institutions and the Federal Government. The 
many special exhibitions shown in the Gallery and then 
throughout the country bring great art treasures to Washington 
and the Nation. In 1999, the Gallery opened a sculpture garden, 
which provides a wonderful opportunity for the public to have 
an outdoor artistic experience in a lovely, contemplative 
setting.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $71,115,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        78,219,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        78,219,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +7,104,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $78,219,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the National Gallery of Art, the same as the budget 
request and an increase of $7,104,000 above the 2002 level. 
Within the amount recommended there is a decrease of $2,119,000 
for repair and maintenance and an increase of $2,119,000 to 
restore the special exhibits budget. The Committee notes that, 
even after the recommended decrease for repair and maintenance, 
there is an increase of 163 percent in funding for that 
activity compared with fiscal year 2002.
    The Committee stresses that level funding for special 
exhibits is critical for both 2003 exhibits and for multi-year 
exhibition planning. The Committee strongly believes that this 
special exhibitions funding should remain in the base budget in 
future years.

            REPAIR, RESTORATION AND RENOVATION OF BUILDINGS




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $14,220,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        16,230,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        16,230,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +2,010,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $16,230,000 for repair, 
restoration and renovation of buildings at the National Gallery 
of Art, the same as the budget request and an increase of 
$2,010,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. The increase above 
the 2002 level is to continue implementation of the Gallery's 
long-term facilities improvement plan.

             John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts

    The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts is a 
living memorial to the late President Kennedy and is the 
National Center for the Performing Arts. The Center consists of 
over 1.5 million square feet of usable floor space with 
visitation averaging 10,000 on a daily basis.

                       OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $19,310,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        16,310,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        16,310,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        -3,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $16,310,000 for operations and 
maintenance, the same as the budget request and $3,000,000 
below the enacted level.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $19,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        17,600,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        17,600,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        -1,400,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $17,600,000 for construction, the 
same as the budget request and $1,400,000 below the enacted 
level.

            Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars is a 
unique institution with a special mission to serve as a living 
memorial to President Woodrow Wilson. The Center performs this 
mandate through its role as an international institute for 
advanced study as well as a facilitator for discussions among 
scholars, public officials, journalists and business leaders 
from across the country on major long-term issues facing 
America and the world.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $7,796,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         8,488,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         8,488,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................          +692,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $8,488,000 for salaries and 
expenses, the same as the budget request and $692,000 above the 
enacted level.

           National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities


                    National Endowment for the Arts


                       GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $98,234,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        99,489,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        99,489,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +1,255,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with 
estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $99,489,000 for grants and 
administration, an increase of $1,255,000 above the 2002 
enacted level and equal to the budget request. The funding 
increase is to offset partially fixed cost increases. The 
Committee expects the NEA to use these grants to enhance 
outreach efforts to more of the Nation, especially for 
underserved rural and urban areas which have not had 
substantial NEA granting activity in the recent past. The 
Committee notes that the Challenge America Arts Fund is 
included under a separate heading and is recommended for 
$17,000,000 for fiscal year 2003. The Committee has not 
provided funding for an office move, so the Committee expects 
to see a supplemental budget request if the General Services 
Administration proceeds with such an action and additional 
funds are required.
    Bill language is recommended under Title III--General 
Provisions, retaining provisions in last year's bill regarding 
restrictions on individual grants, subgranting, and seasonal 
support (Sec. 309); and authority to solicit and invest funds 
(Sec. 310); priority for rural and underserved communities, 
priority for grants that encourage public knowledge, education, 
understanding, and appreciation of the arts, designation of a 
category for grants of national significance, and a 15-percent 
cap on the total amount of grant funds directed to any one 
State (Sec. 311).

                 National Endowment for the Humanities

    The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) was created 
in 1965 to encourage and support National progress in the 
humanities. The NEH provides, through a merit-based review 
process, grants in support of education, research, document and 
artifact preservation, and public service in the humanities.

                       GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................      $108,832,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................       109,632,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................       109,932,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +1,550,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................          +300,000


    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $109,932,000 for grants and 
administration, $1,550,000 above the 2002 level and $300,000 
above the budget request. The Committee has included an 
increase above the request in order to enhance public service, 
education and communications through computer web-site design 
and implementation. The Committee has not provided funding for 
an office move, so the Committee expects to see a supplemental 
budget request if the General Services Administration proceeds 
with such an action and additional funds are required.

                            MATCHING GRANTS




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $16,122,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        16,122,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        16,122,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $16,122,000 for matching grants as 
requested and enacted in fiscal year 2002. The Committee notes 
that regional humanities centers are encouraged to participate 
in the endowment's regular order granting processes rather than 
earmarking funds as was done in fiscal year 2002.

                Institute of Museum and Library Services


                       OFFICE OF MUSEUM SERVICES

                       GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION

    The Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS) was 
created in the Museum and Library Services Act of 1996 (Public 
Law 104-208) which merged library services functions of the 
Department of Education into the Institute of Museum Services. 
These functions now come under the Office of Museum Services 
(OMS) portion of the IMLS. For fiscal year 2003 and thereafter, 
the Committee, as requested by the administration, recommends 
that funding for the OMS appropriation will be consolidated 
with the library functions of the IMLS and funding will be 
provided in the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education 
appropriations bill. This simplification will enhance 
administrative efficiency and achieve synergy by uniting 
library and museum communities in common public service and 
educational efforts.

                      Challenge America Arts Fund


                        CHALLENGE AMERICA GRANTS




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $17,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        17,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        17,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $17,000,000 for the Challenge 
America Arts Fund, as requested and enacted in fiscal year 
2002. The fund, created in fiscal year 2001, provides grants 
for outreach activities of the National Endowment for the Arts.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    The Committee has modified bill language, requested by the 
Administration in Title III--General Provisions, concerning 
small grants and included the modified language under this 
heading.

                        Commission of Fine Arts

    The Commission of Fine Arts was established in 1910 to meet 
the need for a permanent body to advise the government on 
matters pertaining to the arts, and particularly, to guide the 
architectural development of Washington, DC. Over the years the 
Commission's scope has been expanded to include advice on areas 
such as plans for parks, public buildings, location of National 
monuments and development of public squares. As a result, the 
Commission annually reviews approximately 500 projects. In 
fiscal year 1988 the Commission was given responsibility for 
the National Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs program.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $1,254,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         1,224,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         1,255,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................           +31,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................           +31,000


    The Committee recommends $1,255,000 for the Commission of 
Fine Arts, $31,000 above both the enacted and requested funding 
levels. This increase partially offsets fixed cost increases. 
The Committee encourages the Commission to work with Federal 
agencies and the District of Columbia government when those 
entities are designing new facilities, especially anti-
terrorism related structures. The Commission should not wait 
for the final review to provide input. Recent experience 
demonstrates that early involvement not only leads to better 
final products, but also more timely implementation of 
important projects.

               NATIONAL CAPITAL ARTS AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $7,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         7,000,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         7,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The National Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs program was 
established in Public Law 99-190 to support artistic and 
cultural programs in the Nation's Capital. The Committee 
recommends $7,000,000, the same as the budget request and the 
2002 level.

                        ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

    The Committee rejects the administration's proposal to 
repeal the authorization for this program and place this 
funding under the aegis of the District of Columbia Commission 
on Arts and Humanities. The Committee has examined this 
proposal closely and finds that it lacks merit. Accordingly, to 
prevent the further waste of agency staff time and resources on 
such poorly conceived notions, the Committee has included bill 
language which prevents any funds to be expended to examine 
proposals to alter the National Capital Arts and Cultural 
Affairs program. The sole exception is the Office of Management 
and Budget, which may spend its own funds on this matter if the 
office continues to feel such changes are worth pursuing 
despite clear Congressional disapproval.

               Advisory Council on Historic Preservation


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 established 
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The Advisory 
Council was reauthorized as part of the Omnibus Parks and 
Public Lands Management Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-333). The 
Council's mandate is to further the National policy of 
preserving historic and cultural resources for the benefit of 
present and future generations. The Council advises the 
President and Congress on preservation matters and provides 
consultation on historic properties threatened by Federal 
action.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $3,400,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         3,667,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         3,667,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................          +267,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $3,667,000 for the Advisory 
Council on Historic Preservation, $267,000 above the 2002 level 
and equal to the budget request. The funding increase is to 
partially offset fixed cost increases. The Committee has not 
provided funding for an office move, so the Committee expects 
to see a supplemental budget request if the General Services 
Administration proceeds with such an action and additional 
funds are required.

                  National Capital Planning Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    The National Capital Planning Act of 1952 designated the 
National Capital Planning Commission as the central planning 
agency for the Federal government in the National Capital 
Region. The three major functions of the Commission are to 
prepare and adopt the Federal elements of the National Capital 
Comprehensive Plan, prepare an annual report on a five-year 
projection of the Federal Capital Improvement Program, and 
review plans and proposals submitted to the Commission.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................        $8,011,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................         7,253,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................         7,553,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002,..............................          -458,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................          +300,000


    The Committee recommends $7,553,000, $300,000 above the 
budget request. The increase above the request is to offset 
partially fixed cost increases. The Committee notes that the 
2002 enacted funding included a one-time emergency 
appropriation of $758,000 to work on anti-terrorism planning. 
The Committee encourages the Commission to continue their close 
collaboration with Federal agencies and the District of 
Columbia government when they are designing new facilities, 
especially anti-terrorism related structures, and not wait for 
final review to provide input. Recent experience demonstrates 
that early involvement not only leads to better final products, 
but also more timely implementation of important projects. The 
Committee appreciates continued regular updates from the 
Commission concerning anti-terrorism structural improvement 
projects in the national capital region.

                United States Holocaust Memorial Museum


                       HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM

    In 1980 Congress passed legislation creating a 65 member 
Holocaust Memorial Council with the mandate to create and 
oversee a living memorial/museum to victims of holocausts. The 
museum opened in April 1993. Construction costs for the museum 
came solely from donated funds raised by the U.S. Holocaust 
Memorial Museum Campaign and appropriated funds were used for 
planning and development of programmatic components, overall 
administrative support, and annual commemorative observances. 
Since the opening of the museum, appropriated funds have been 
provided to pay for the ongoing operating costs of the museum 
as authorized by Public Law 102-529 and Public Law 106-292.




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $36,028,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        38,663,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        38,663,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        +2,635,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $38,663,000 for the Holocaust 
Memorial Museum, the same as the budget request and $2,635,000 
above the enacted level.

                             Presidio Trust


                          PRESIDIO TRUST FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2002...........................       $23,125,000
Budget estimate, 2003.................................        21,327,000
Recommended, 2003.....................................        21,327,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2002...............................        -1,798,000
    Budget estimate, 2003.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $21,327,000 for the Presidio 
Trust, the same as the budget request and $1,798,000 below the 
enacted level.
    In the four years that it has managed the Presidio, the 
Trust has made significant progress in achieving the key goals 
outlined in the Trust's authorizing legislation: preserving 
natural resources, restoring historic buildings, improving 
recreational facilities, upgrading park infrastructure, and 
making the park financially self-sustaining by 2013. At this 
juncture in the Trust's organizational evolution, the Committee 
directs the Trust to contract with the National Academy of 
Public Administration. The scope of work should focus on 
finance and business management practices, including financial 
assumptions and projections; a review of major capital 
construction projects; and the management and use of government 
loan authorities.

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Section 301 provides for public availability of information 
on consulting services contracts.
    Section 302 prohibits activities to promote public support 
or opposition to legislative proposals.
    Section 303 provides for annual appropriations unless 
expressly provided otherwise in this Act.
    Section 304 limits the use of personal cooks, chauffeurs or 
servants.
    Section 305 limits assessments against programs without 
Committee approval.
    Section 306 limits the sale of giant sequoia.
    Section 307 continues a limitation on accepting and 
processing applications for patents and on the patenting of 
Federal lands; permits processing of grandfathered 
applications; and permits third-party contractors to process 
grandfathered applications.
    Section 308 limits payments for contract support costs in 
past years to the funds available in law and accompanying 
report language in those years for the Bureau of Indian Affairs 
and the Indian Health Service.
    Section 309 continues provision specifying reforms and 
limitations dealing with the National Endowment for the Arts.
    Section 310 continues a provision permitting the collection 
and use of private funds by the National Endowment for the Arts 
and the National Endowment for the Humanities.
    Section 311 continues direction to the National Endowment 
for the Arts on funding distribution.
    Section 312 continues a limitation on completing and 
issuing the five-year program under the Forest and Rangeland 
Renewable Resources Planning Act.
    Section 313 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
funds to support government-wide administrative functions 
unless they are justified in the budget process and approved by 
the House and Senate Appropriations Committees.
    Section 314 continues a provision which permits the Forest 
Service to use the roads and trails fund for backlog 
maintenance and priority forest health treatments.
    Section 315 continues a provision limiting the use of 
answering machines during core business hours except in case of 
emergency and requires an option of talking to a person. The 
American taxpayer deserves to receive personal attention from 
public servants.
    Section 316 continues a provision carried last year 
regulating the export of Western redcedar from National forest 
system lands in Alaska.
    Section 317 prohibits the Forest Service from using 
projects under the recreation fee demonstration program to 
supplant existing concessions.
    Section 318 clarifies the Forest Service land management 
planning revision requirements.
    Section 319 clarifies the requirement for mutually 
significant benefits when the Forest Service conducts 
cooperative agreements.
    Section 320 continues a provision limiting preleasing, 
leasing and related activities within the boundaries of 
National monuments.
    Section 321 amends legislation to extend for one additional 
year the Forest Service's authority for stewardship end result 
contracts.
    Section 322 makes a technical correction to the Cabin User 
Fee Fairness Act of 2000.
    Section 323 extends the Forest Service Conveyances Pilot 
Program.
    Section 324 deals with processing expired grazing permits 
by the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service. This 
provision was carried in previous years for the Bureau of Land 
Management. This year it has been extended to the Forest 
Service.
    Section 325 provides authority for the staff of 
Congressionally established foundations to use GSA contract 
airfare rates and Federal government hotel accommodation rates 
when on official business.
    Section 326 authorizes a demonstration program for the 
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe; which permits the Eagle Butte 
service unit to pay higher salaries and bonuses to attract 
health professionals, if they can do so at no additional cost. 
The tribe has reported that part-time contract employees 
currently are costing more than it would cost the tribe to hire 
full-time permanent employees under this demonstration program.
    Section 327 prohibits the transfer of funds to other 
agencies other than provided in this Act.
    Section 328 provides the Secretary of the Interior and the 
Secretary of Agriculture the authority to enter into reciprocal 
agreements with foreign nations concerning the personal 
liability of firefighters.
    Section 329 continues a legislative provision which was in 
the fiscal year 2002 Energy and Water Development 
Appropriations Act. This provision limits funds for oil or gas 
leasing or permitting on the Finger Lakes National Forest, NY.

                              Rescissions

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2), rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following table is submitted 
describing the rescissions recommended in the accompanying 
bill:
                                                                 Amounts
                                                         recommended for
        Department and activity                               rescission
Department of the Interior: Land and Water Conservation 
    Fund (contract authority)...........................     $30,000,000
Smithsonian Institution: Salaries and Expenses..........      14,100,000

                           Transfer of Funds

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2), rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following table is submitted 
describing the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying 
bill.

             APPROPRIATION TRANSFERS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Account to
 Account from which transfer      Amount     which transfer     Amount
        is to be made                        is to be made
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are no specific appropriation transfers recommended 
in this bill.

                 Changes in Application of Existing Law

    Pursuant to clause 3, rule XIII of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives, the following Statements are submitted 
describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill, 
which directly or indirectly change the application of existing 
law. In most instances these provisions have been included in 
prior appropriations Acts.
    The bill provides that certain appropriations items remain 
available until expended or extends the availability of funds 
beyond the fiscal year where programs or projects are 
continuing in nature under the provisions of authorizing 
legislation but for which that legislation does not 
specifically authorize such extended availability. This 
authority tends to result in savings by preventing the practice 
of committing funds at the end of the fiscal year.
    The bill includes, in certain instances, limitations on the 
obligation of funds for particular functions or programs. These 
limitations include restrictions on the obligation of funds for 
administrative expenses, travel expenses, the use of 
consultants, and programmatic areas within the overall 
jurisdiction of a particular agency.
    The Committee has included limitations for official 
entertainment or reception and representation expenses for 
selected agencies in the bill.
    Language is included in the various parts of the bill to 
continue ongoing activities of those Federal agencies, which 
require annual authorization or additional legislation which to 
date, has not been enacted.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Management of lands and resources, permitting the use of 
receipts from the Land and Water Conservation Act of 1965; 
providing funds to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation 
under certain conditions; permitting the use of fees from 
communication site rentals; limiting the use of funds for 
destroying wild horses and burros; and permitting the 
collection of fees for processing mining applications and for 
certain public land uses and permitting the use of these fees 
for program operations.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Wildland fire management, permitting the use of funds from 
other accounts for firefighting; permitting the use of funds 
for lodging and subsistence of firefighters; permitting the 
acceptance and use of funds for firefighting; permitting the 
use of grants contracts and cooperative agreements for 
hazardous fuels reduction, including cost-sharing and local 
assistance; permitting reimbursement to the Fish and Wildlife 
Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service for 
consultation activities under the Endangered Species Act; and 
permitting the use of firefighting funds for the leasing of 
properties of the construction of facilities.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Central hazardous materials fund, providing that sums received 
from a party for remedial actions shall be credited to the 
account, and defining non-monetary payments.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Payments in lieu of taxes, to exclude any payment that is less 
than $100.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Oregon and California grant lands, authorizing the transfer of 
receipts to the Treasury.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Forest ecosystems health and recovery fund, permitting the use 
of salvage timber receipts.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Service charges, deposits, and forfeitures, allowing the use of 
funds on any damaged public lands.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Administrative provisions, permitting the payment of rewards 
for information on violations of law on Bureau lands and 
providing for cost-sharing arrangements for printing services.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Resource management, allowing for the maintenance of 
the herd of long-horned cattle on the Wichita Mountains 
Wildlife Refuge. Without this language, the long-horned cattle 
would have to be removed from the refuge. Language also is 
included providing for the Natural Communities Conservation 
Planning program and for a Youth Conservation Corps; limiting 
funding for certain Endangered Species Act listing programs; 
permitting payment for information or rewards in the law 
enforcement program; and earmarking funds for contaminant 
analysis.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Construction, permitting a single procurement for the 
expansion of the forensics laboratory in Oregon.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Land acquisition, prohibiting the use of project funds 
for overhead expenses.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Landowner incentive program, providing matching grants 
to States and territories.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Stewardship grants, providing for grants for private 
conservation efforts.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, North American wetlands conservation fund, limiting 
the use of funds above the 2001 funding level to U.S. projects.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, State wildlife grants, specifying the distribution 
formula and planning and cost-sharing requirements and 
requiring that funds unobligated after two years be 
reapportioned.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Administrative provisions, providing for repair of 
damage to public roads; providing options for the purchase of 
land not to exceed $1; providing for installation of certain 
recreation facilities; and permitting the maintenance and 
improvement of aquaria and other facilities, the acceptance of 
donated aircraft, and cost-shared arrangements for printing 
services. Language also is included limiting the use of funds 
for establishing new refuges.
    Language is included under National Park Service, Operation 
of the National park system, to allow road maintenance service 
to trucking permittees on a reimbursable basis. This provision 
has been included in annual appropriations Acts since 1954. 
Language also is included providing for a Youth Conservation 
Corps program; providing for the use of funds in support of 
Everglades land acquisition; permitting reimbursement to the 
Park Police for special events under limited circumstances; and 
limiting the use of funds for a new associate director position 
for law enforcement.
    Language is included under National Park Service, Historic 
preservation fund, providing a grant to the National Trust for 
Historic Preservation.
    Language is included under National Park Service, Land and 
water conservation fund, rescinding $30 million in contract 
authority.
    Language is included under National Park Service, Land 
acquisition and State assistance, permitting the use of funds 
to assist the State of Florida with Everglades restoration; 
making the use of funds for Everglades contingent on certain 
conditions; limiting the use of funds to establish a 
contingency fund for State grants; and clarifying Congressional 
intent with respect to land acquisition and flood protection in 
the ``8.5 Square Mile Area''.
    Language is included under National Park Service, 
Administrative provisions, requiring the inclusion of 18 U.S.C. 
1913 in the text of grant and contract documents; preventing 
the implementation of an agreement for the redevelopment of the 
southern end of Ellis Island; limiting the use of funds for the 
United Nation's Biodiversity Convention; permitting the use of 
funds for workplace safety needs; permitting the collection and 
use of funds for repair of utilities; and authorizing 
reimbursable agreements in advance of receipt of funds.
    Language is included under U.S. Geological Survey, Surveys, 
investigations and research, providing for two-year 
availability of funds for biological research and for the 
operations of cooperative research units; prohibiting the 
conduct of new surveys on private property without permission; 
and requiring cost sharing for cooperative topographic mapping 
and water resource data collection activities.
    Language is included under U.S. Geological Survey, 
Administrative provisions, permitting contracting for certain 
mapping and surveys; permitting construction of facilities; 
permitting acquisition of land for certain uses; allowing 
payment of expenses for the National Committee on Geology; 
permitting payments to interstate compact negotiators; and 
permitting the use of certain contracts, grants, and 
cooperative agreements.
    Language is included under Minerals Management Service, 
Royalty and offshore minerals management, permitting the use of 
excess receipts from Outer Continental Shelf leasing 
activities; providing for reasonable expenses related to 
volunteer beach and marine clean-up activities; providing for 
refunds for overpayments on Indian allottee leases; providing 
for collecting royalties and late payment interest on amounts 
received in settlements associated with Federal and Indian 
leases; and permitting the use of revenues from a royalty-in-
kind program.
    Language is included under Office of Surface Mining 
Reclamation and Enforcement, Regulation and Technology, 
permitting the use of moneys collected pursuant to assessment 
of civil penalties to reclaim lands affected by coal mining 
after August 3, 1977 and permitting payment to State and tribal 
personnel for travel and per diem expenses for training.
    Language is included under Office of Surface Mining 
Reclamation and Enforcement, Abandoned mine reclamation fund, 
limiting the amounts available for emergency reclamation 
projects; allowing the use of debt recovery to pay for debt 
collection; and earmarking funds for acid mine drainage.
    Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
Operation of Indian programs, limiting funds for contract 
support costs and for administrative cost grants for schools; 
permitting the use of tribal priority allocations for general 
assistance payments to individuals, for contract support costs, 
and for repair and replacement of schools; allowing changes to 
certain eligibility criteria by tribal governments, allowing 
the transfer of certain forestry funds; and providing for an 
Indian self-determination fund.
    Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
Construction, providing that 6 percent of Federal Highway Trust 
Fund contract authority may be used for management costs; 
providing for the transfer of Navajo irrigation project funds 
to the Bureau of Reclamation; providing Safety of Dams funds on 
a non-reimbursable basis; requiring the use of administrative 
and cost accounting principles for certain school construction 
projects and exempting such projects from certain requirements; 
requiring conformance with building codes and health and safety 
standards; and specifying the procedure for dispute resolution.
    Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
Administrative provisions, prohibiting funding of Alaska 
schools; limiting the number of schools and the expansion of 
grade levels in individual schools; limiting the use of funds 
for contracts, grants and cooperative agreements; and requiring 
an evaluation of certain Bureau schools.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, Insular 
Affairs, Assistance to Territories, requiring audits of the 
financial transactions of the Territorial governments by the 
General Accounting Office; providing grant funding under 
certain terms of the Agreement of the Special Representatives 
on Future United States Financial Assistance for the Northern 
Mariana Islands; providing a grant to the Close-Up foundation; 
allowing appropriations for disaster assistance to be used as 
non-Federal matching funds for hazard mitigation grants; 
providing for payments to the Prior Service Benefits Trust Fund 
and limiting administrative expenses; and providing for capital 
infrastructure in various Territories.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, 
Departmental management, salaries and expenses, permitting 
payments to former Bureau of Mines workers.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, Office of 
Special Trustee for American Indians, specifying that the 
statute of limitations shall not commence on any claim 
resulting from trust funds losses; exempting quarterly 
statements for accounts less than $1; requiring annual 
statements and records maintenance; and permitting the use of 
recoveries from erroneous payments.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, Indian 
land consolidation, permitting transfers of funds for 
administration and permitting cooperative agreements with 
tribes to acquire fractional interests.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, 
Administrative provisions, prohibiting the use of working 
capital or consolidated working funds to augment certain 
offices and allowing the acquisition of aircraft through 
various means and the sale of existing aircraft with proceeds 
used to offset the purchase price of replacement aircraft.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, to allow transfer of funds in certain 
emergency situations and requiring replacement with a 
supplemental appropriation request and designating certain 
transferred funds as ``emergency requirements'' under the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
    Language is included under General provisions, Department 
of the Interior, to permit the Department to consolidate 
services and receive reimbursement for said services. Language 
also is included providing for uniform allowances.
    Language is included under General provisions, Department 
of the Interior, to allow for obligations in connection with 
contracts issued for services or rentals for periods not in 
excess of 12 months beginning at any time during the fiscal 
year.
    Language is included under General provisions, Department 
of the Interior, restricting various oil and gas preleasing, 
leasing, exploration and drilling activities within the Outer 
Continental Shelf in the Georges Bank-North Atlantic planning 
area, Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic planning area, Eastern 
Gulf of Mexico planning area, North Aleutian Basin planning 
area, Northern, Southern and Central California planning areas, 
and Washington/Oregon planning area.
    Language is included under General provisions, Department 
of the Interior, limiting the investment of Federal funds by 
Indian tribes; limiting the use of funds for contract support 
costs; and prohibiting fee exemptions for non-local traffic 
through National Parks.
    Language is included under General provisions, Department 
of the Interior, permitting the transfer of funds between the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee for 
American Indians; providing permanent authority for negotiating 
agreements and leases at Fort Baker at the Golden Gate NRA and 
permitting the retention of receipts; providing for 
administrative law judges to handle Indian issues; permitting 
the redistribution of certain Indian funds with limitations; 
directing allocation of funds for Bureau of Indian Affairs 
funded post-secondary schools; limiting the use of the Huron 
Cemetery to religious and cultural activities; permitting the 
conveyance of the Twin Cities Research Center; extending for 
one year the transportation fee retention provision of the 
National Parks Omnibus Management Act of 1988; authorizing a 
cooperative agreement with the Golden Gate National Parks 
Association; permitting the Bureau of Land Management to retain 
funds from the sale of seeds and seedlings; permitting the sale 
of equipment and interests at the White River Oil Shale Mine in 
Utah and the retention of receipts; authorizing funding 
transfers for Shenandoah Valley Battlefield NHD and Ice Age 
NST; and prohibiting the closure of the underground lunchroom 
at Carlsbad Caverns NP.
    Language is included under General Provision, Department of 
the Interior, prohibiting demolition of the bridge between New 
Jersey and Ellis Island; prohibiting posting of clothing 
optional signs at Canaveral NS; permitting the use of funds for 
incidental expenses related to the Centennial of the National 
Wildlife Refuge System; authorizing a cooperative agreement 
between the National Park Service and Capital Concerts; 
requiring delivery of a report to certain committees of 
Congress on an historical accounting of Indian trust funds for 
plaintiffs in the Cobell v. Norton litigation; limiting 
compensation for the Special Master and Court Monitor for the 
Cobell v. Norton litigation; requiring new Special Trustee 
Advisory Board appointees; allowing payment of attorney fees 
for Federal employees related to the Cobell v. Norton 
litigation; allowing Federal firefighting activities on non-
Federal lands; extending the deadline for creation of a 
commission on a possible Museum of African American History and 
extending the availability of funds for this purpose; requiring 
that the Secretary of the Interior be a co-equal partner on the 
Everglades RECOVER team; requiring the Fish and Wildlife 
Service to mark hatchery salmon; naming the Bitter Lake NWR, NM 
Vistor Center for Joseph R. Skeen; and establishing a 
commission to review Indian gaming.
    Language is included under Forest Service, State and 
private forestry, requiring House and Senate Appropriations 
Committee approval before releasing forest legacy project 
funds.
    Language is included under Forest Service, National forest 
system, allowing 50 percent of the fees collected under the 
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act to remain available until 
expended; requiring the fiscal year 2004 budget justification 
to display unobligated balances available at the start of 
fiscal year 2003; and permitting the transfer of funds to the 
Bureau of Land Management for wild horse and burro management.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Wildland fire 
management, allowing the use of funds to repay advances from 
other accounts and requiring 50 percent of any unobligated 
balances remaining at the end of fiscal year 2002, excepting 
hazardous fuels funding, to be transferred to the Knutson-
Vandenberg Fund as repayment for past advances; permitting the 
use of funds for the Joint Fire Science program; providing for 
grants and cooperative agreements with local communities; 
providing for use of funds on adjacent, non-Federal lands for 
hazard reduction; providing contract authority for fuel 
reduction projects; and allowing transfer of funds for 
Endangered Species Act consultation.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Capital 
improvement and maintenance, allowing funds to be used for road 
decommissioning and requiring that no road decommissioning be 
funded until notice and an opportunity for public comment has 
been provided.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Range betterment 
fund, providing that 6 percent of the funds may be used for 
administrative expenses.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative 
provisions, providing that proceeds from the sale of aircraft 
may be used to purchase replacement aircraft; permitting the 
transfer of funds for firefighting from other USDA account; 
allowing funds to be used through the Agency for International 
Development and the Foreign Agricultural Service for work in 
foreign countries and to support other forestry activities 
outside of the United States.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative 
provisions, prohibiting the following without advance approval: 
(1) the transfer of funds under the Department of Agriculture 
transfer authority; (2) reprogramming of funds; and (3) 
transfer of funds in excess of the level transferred during 
fiscal year 2000 to the working capital fund of the Department 
of Agriculture.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative 
provisions, providing for a Youth Conservation Corps program; 
providing for matching funds and administrative expenses for 
the National Forest Foundation and also matching funds for the 
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; providing funds for 
sustainable rural development; permitting the transfer of 
certain funds to the State of Washington fish and wildlife 
department for planned projects; providing payments to counties 
within the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area; providing 
authority to the Pinchot Institute for activities at Grey 
Towers National Historic Landmark; allowing payments to Del 
Norte County, CA; permitting limited reimbursements to the 
Office of General Counsel in USDA; and allowing the limited use 
of funds for law enforcement emergencies.
    Language is included under Department of Energy, Clean coal 
technology deferring certain funding for one year.
    Language is included under Department of Energy, Fossil 
energy, specifying certain conditions for the Clean Coal Power 
Initiative; limiting the field testing of nuclear explosives 
for the recovery of oil and gas; and permitting the use of 
funds from other programs accounts for the National Energy 
Technology Laboratory.
    Language is included under Department of Energy, Naval 
Petroleum and oil shale reserves, permitting the use of 
unobligated balances.
    Language is included under the Department of Energy, Energy 
conservation, providing allocations of grants for 
weatherization and State energy conservation.
    Language is included under Administrative provisions, 
Department of Energy, providing for vehicle and guard services 
and uniform allowances; limiting programs of price supports and 
loan guarantees to what is provided in appropriations Acts; 
providing for the transfer of funds to other agencies of the 
Government; providing for retention of revenues by the 
Secretary of Energy on certain projects; requiring certain 
contracts be submitted to Congress prior to implementation; 
prohibiting issuance of procurement documents without 
appropriations; and permitting the use of contributions and 
fees for cooperative projects.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, Indian 
health services, providing that certain contracts and grants 
may be performed in two fiscal years; exempting certain tribal 
funding from fiscal year constraints; limiting funds for 
catastrophic care, loan repayment and certain contracts; 
capping contract support cost spending; providing for use of 
collections under Title IV of the Indian Health Care 
Improvement Act; and permitting the use of Indian Health Care 
Improvement Fund monies for facilities improvement.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, Indian 
health facilities, providing that funds may be used to purchase 
land, modular buildings and trailers; providing for certain 
staff quarters construction in Alaska; providing for certain 
purchases and for a demolition fund; providing authority for 
contracts for small ambulatory facilities; and providing for 
the transfer of land to IHS on St. Paul Island, AK.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, 
Administrative provisions, providing for payments for telephone 
service in private residences in the field, purchase of 
reprints, and purchase and erection of portable buildings and 
allowing deobligation and reobligation of funds applied to 
self-governance funding agreements.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, 
Administrative provisions, providing that health care may be 
extended to non-Indians at Indian Health Service facilities and 
providing for expenditure of funds transferred to IHS from the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, 
Administrative provisions, preventing the Indian Health Service 
from billing Indians in order to collect from third-party 
payers until Congress has agreed to implement a specific 
policy.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, 
Administrative provisions, allowing payment of expenses for 
meeting attendance; specifying that certain funds shall not be 
subject to certain travel limitations; prohibiting the 
expenditure of funds to implement new eligibility regulations; 
providing that funds be apportioned only in the appropriation 
structure in this Act; prohibiting changing the appropriations 
structure without approval of the Appropriations Committees; 
and permitting the sale of goods and services for fees and for 
the use of those fees.
    Language is included under Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian 
Relocation, Salaries and expenses, defining eligible 
relocatees; prohibiting movement of any single Navajo or Navajo 
family unless a new or replacement home is available; limiting 
relocatees to one new or replacement home; and establishing a 
priority for relocation of Navajos to those certified eligible 
who have selected and received homesites on the Navajo 
reservation or selected a replacement residence off the Navajo 
reservation.
    Language is included under Institute of American Indian and 
Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development, Payment to the 
Institute, earmarking funds for the Library Technology Center.
    Language is included under Smithsonian Institution, 
Salaries and expenses, allowing for advance payments to 
independent contractors performing research services or 
participating in official Smithsonian presentations; providing 
that funds may be used to support American overseas research 
centers; permitting the use of certain funds for the Victor 
Building; and rescinding prior year funds.
    Language is included under Smithsonian Institution, repair, 
restoration and alteration of facilities, permitting the 
Smithsonian Institution to select contractors for certain 
purposes on the basis of contractor qualifications as well as 
price and earmarking funds for the National Zoo.
    Language is included under Smithsonian Institution, 
Administrative provisions, precluding any changes to the 
Smithsonian science program without prior approval of the Board 
of Regents; limiting the design or expansion of current space 
or facilities without prior approval of the Committee; and 
limiting reprogramming of funds and the use of funds for the 
Holt House.
    Language is included under National Gallery of Art, 
Salaries and expenses, allowing payment in advance for 
membership in library, museum, and art associations or 
societies; providing uniform allowances and for restoration and 
repair of works of art by contract without advertising; and 
providing no-year availability of funds for special 
exhibitions.
    Language is included under National Gallery of Art, Repair, 
restoration and renovation of buildings, permitting the Gallery 
to perform work by contract or otherwise and to select 
contractors for certain purposes on the basis of contractor 
qualifications as well as price.
    Language is included under National Foundation for the 
Humanities, Matching grants, allowing obligation of current and 
prior year funds of gifts, bequests, and devises of money for 
which equal amounts have not previously been appropriated.
    Language is included under National Foundation on the Arts 
and the Humanities, Administrative provisions, requiring 
certain language in contracts and grants permitting the use of 
non-appropriated funds for reception expenses, and allowing the 
chairperson of the NEA to approve small grants under limited 
circumstances.
    Language is included under Commission of Fine Arts, 
Salaries and expenses, permitting the charging and use of fees 
for its publications.
    Language is included under Commission of Fine Arts, 
National Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs limiting the use of 
funds to study the alteration or transfer of this program.
    Language is included under Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation, Salaries and expenses, restricting hiring anyone 
at Executive Level V or higher.
    Language is included under National Capital Planning 
Commission, Salaries and expenses, providing a pay level at the 
rate of Executive Level IV for all appointed members.
    Language is included under Holocaust Memorial Council, 
providing no year funding availability for repair and 
rehabilitation and museums exhibitions.
    Language is included under Title III--General provisions, 
providing for availability of information on consulting 
services contracts; prohibiting the use of funds to distribute 
literature either to promote or oppose legislative proposals on 
which Congressional action is incomplete; prohibiting the use 
of funds to provide personal cooks, chauffeurs or other 
personal servants to any office or employee; specifying that 
funds are for one year unless provided otherwise; prohibiting 
assessments against programs funded in this bill; and 
prohibiting the sale of giant sequoia trees in a manner 
different from 2002.
    Language is included under Title III--General provisions, 
continuing a limitation on accepting and processing 
applications for patents and on the patenting of Federal lands; 
permitting processing of grandfathered applications; and 
permitting third-party contractors to process grandfathered 
applications.
    Language is included under Title III--General provisions, 
limiting the use of funds for contract support costs on Indian 
contracts.
    Language is included under Title III--General provisions, 
making reforms in the National Endowment for the Arts, 
including funding distribution reforms; permitting the National 
Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities to collect, invest 
and use private donations; limiting funds for completing or 
issuing the five-year program under the Forest and Rangeland 
Renewable Resources Planning Act; limiting the use of funds for 
any government-wide administrative functions; permitting the 
use of Forest Service road and trail funds for maintenance and 
forest health; limiting the use of telephone answering 
machines; and limiting the sale for export of western red cedar 
in Alaska.
    Language is included under Title III--General Provisions, 
prohibiting the Forest Service from using projects under the 
recreation fee demonstration program to supplant existing 
concessions and permitting the use of Forest land management 
plans pending completion of required revisions.
    Language is included under Title III--General Provisions, 
clarifying the requirement for mutually significant benefits 
when the Forest Service conducts cooperative agreements; 
limiting leasing and preleasing activities within National 
Monuments; extending the authority for Forest Service 
stewardship and results contracts; making a technical 
correction to the Cabin User Fee Fairness Act of 2000; 
extending and expanding the pilot program allowing the Forest 
Service to dispose of certain excess structures and reinvest 
the proceeds for maintenance and rehabilitation; providing for 
processing expired grazing permits by the Bureau of Land 
Management and the Forest Service; providing authority for the 
staff of Congressionally established foundations to use GSA 
contract airfare rates and Federal government hotel 
accommodation rates when on official business; authorizing a 
demonstration program for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, which 
permits the Eagle Butte service unit to pay higher salaries and 
bonuses to attract health professionals; prohibiting the 
transfer of funds to other agencies other than provided in this 
Act; providing the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary 
of Agriculture the authority to enter into reciprocal 
agreements with foreign nations concerning the personal 
liability of firefighters; and limiting the use of funds to 
prepare or issue a permit or lease for oil or gas drilling in 
the Finger Lakes National Forest, NY.

                  Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following table lists the 
appropriations in the accompanying bill which are not 
authorized by law:

                                             [Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Appropriations
                                        Last year of                               in last year   Appropriations
                                        authorization     Authorization level           of         in this bill
                                                                                   authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Endowment for the Arts......            1993  ``Such sums as may be            $174,460        $116,489
                                                        necessary''.
National Endowment for the Humanities            1993  ``Such sums as may be             177,413         126,054
                                                        necessary''.
Office of Navajo & Hopi Indian                   2000  $30,000..................           8,000          14,491
 Relocation.

     U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Resources Management:
    Endangered Species Act Amendments            1992  $41,500..................          35,721         130,244
     of 1988.
    Marine Mammal Protection Act                 1999  $10,296..................           2,008           2,453
     Amendments of 1994.

         Department of Energy

Energy Information Administration....            1992  NA.......................          76,300          80,611
Office of Fossil Energy:
    Coal.............................            1997  ``Such sums as may be             149,629         207,700
                                                        necessary''.
    Enhanced Oil Recovery............            1997  NA.......................          45,937          44,400
    Natural Gas......................            1997  NA.......................          23,614          48,190
    Fuel Cells.......................            1997  NA.......................          50,117          71,000
Energy Efficiency and Renewable
 Energy:
    Transportation R&D...............            1994  $160,000.................         176,000         273,864
    Buildings, Industry..............            1994  $275,000.................         255,700         562,152
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee notes that authorizing legislation for many 
of these programs is in various stages of the legislative 
process and these authorizations are expected to be enacted 
into law later this year.

         Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following is a statement of 
general performance goals and objectives for which this measure 
authorizes funding:
    The Committee on Appropriations considers program 
performance, including a program's success in developing and 
attaining outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing 
funding recommendations.

                          Full Committee Votes

    Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of 
the House of Representatives, the results of each roll call 
vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with 
the names of those voting for and those voting against, are 
printed below: there were no recorded votes.

          Compliance With Rule XIII, CL. 3(e) (Ramseyer Rule)

    In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

        SECTION 412(b) OF THE NATIONAL PARKS OMNIBUS ACT OF 1988

    (16 U.S.C. 5961(b)) is amended as follows:
    (b) Obligation of Funds.--Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, with respect to a service contract for the 
provision solely of transportation services at Zion National 
Park, the Secretary may obligate the expenditure of fees 
received in fiscal year [2002] 2003 under section 501 before 
the fees are received.

 SECTION 124(a) OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                               ACT, 1997

    (16 U.S.C. 1011(a)) is amended as follows:
    (a) In General.--For fiscal year 1997 and thereafter, 
appropriations made for the Bureau of Land Management, 
including appropriations for the Wildland Fire Management 
account allocated to the National Park Service, Fish and 
Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, may be used 
by the Secretary of the Interior for the purpose of entering 
into cooperative agreements with the heads of other Federal 
agencies, tribal, State, and local governments, private and 
nonprofit entities, and landowners for the protection, 
restoration, and enhancement of fish and wildlife habitat and 
other resources on public and private lands and the reduction 
of risk from natural disaster where public safety threatened 
that benefit these resources on public lands within the 
watershed.

  SECTION 347 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999


        STEWARDSHIP END RESULT CONTRACTING DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

    Sec. 374 (a) In General.-- Until September 30, [2004] 2005, 
the Forest Service may enter into, via agreement or contract as 
appropriate, no more than twenty-eight (28) stewardship 
contracting demonstration pilot projects with private persons 
or other public or private entities, of which Region One of the 
Forest Service shall have the authority to enter into nine (9) 
such contracts, to perform services to achieve land management 
goals for the national forests that meet local and rural 
community needs.

  SECTION 329 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2002

    Sec. 329. (a) * * *
    (b) Limitation.-- Conveyances on not more than [10] 20 
sites may be made under the authority of this section, and the 
Secretary of Agriculture shall obtain the concurrence of the 
Committee on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and 
the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate in advance of 
each conveyance.
    (d) Duration of Authority.-- The authority provided by this 
section expires on September 30, [2005] 2006.

         SECTION 608 OF THE CABIN USER FEE FAIRNESS ACT OF 2000


SEC. 608. ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT OF CABIN USER FEE.

    (a) * * *
    (b) Initial Index.--
          (1) * * *
          (2) Statewide changes.-- In determining the annual 
        adjustment to the cabin user fee for an authorization 
        located in a county in which agricultural land prices 
        are influenced by the [value influences] criteria 
        described in [section 606(b)(3)] section 606(b)(2), the 
        Secretary shall use average statewide changes in the 
        State in which the lot is located.

                    Five-Year Projection of Outlays

    In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, the following table contains five-year projections 
associated with the budget authority provided in the 
accompanying bill:

                              (In millions)

Budget authority (discretionary)........................          19,730
Outlays:
    Fiscal year 2003....................................          12,461
    Fiscal year 2004....................................           4,400
    Fiscal year 2005....................................           1,700
    Fiscal year 2006....................................             756
    Fiscal year 2007 and future years...................             402

               Assistance to State and Local Governments

    In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344), as 
amended, the financial assistance to State and local 
governments is as follows:

                              (In millions)

New budget authority....................................           2,744
Fiscal year 2003 outlays resulting therefrom............           1,513



      MINORITY VIEWS OF THE HONORABLE NORMAN DICKS AND DAVID OBEY

    In submitting these views, the Minority wishes to express 
its appreciation for the cooperative and bi-partisan manner in 
which the Interior Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2003 has 
been handled by the Chairman and the Majority. The Minority has 
been consulted throughout the process and believes that its 
views are reflected in many aspects of the bill. While we do 
not agree with every recommendation and continue to work for 
improvements in certain areas, in its entirety we believe that 
the Interior bill is one which Members from both parties can 
support.
    In expressing our support for a fair bill which addresses 
the highest priorities within a constrained budget allocation, 
the Minority does not mean to leave the impression that we 
believe this bill fully addresses the natural resource and 
human needs which are addressed by agencies within the Interior 
Subcommittee's jurisdiction. In fact, the $19,730 million 
allocation for 2003, while almost $900 million above the 
president's request, is only 2.8 percent above the 2002 
spending levels--an increase barely able to keep up with 
inflation. Nonetheless, the allocation has allowed the 
Committee to restore most of the cuts proposed in the Bush 
budget, especially those poorly justified reductions for energy 
research, forest fire prevention and preparedness, natural 
resource science at the U.S. Geological Survey and programs for 
urban parks.
    There are also important increases. These include $20 
million for the weatherization program, which is funded at $250 
million. This program has been increased by $98 million over 
the last two years and the increased funding will lead to 
significant savings in energy as additional homes, schools and 
hospitals are insulated. It is critical to lower income 
families who often live in poorly insulated houses and who have 
seen the cost of heating double in the last year. There are 
also important increases for the land management agencies, 
especially the Fish and Wildlife Service which celebrates its 
100th anniversary and the Minority was particularly pleased to 
see the $99 million increase over the request for Indian 
schools and Indian health programs. While far less than they 
need, it is a good recommendation given the allocation.
    The Minority is pleased to join with the Majority in 
support of the sections of this bill which fully fund the new 
Conservation Trust Fund created two years ago by the Congress 
(title VIII of the Fiscal Year 2001 Interior Appropriations 
Act.). This new funding structure was created as our commitment 
to significant increases for preservation of this country's 
natural and cultural resources. It expands programs which 
support critical land acquisition where lands are threatened by 
development, accelerates efforts to deal with maintenance needs 
of our parks, refuges and forests, enhances efforts to protect 
wildlife, and expands federal support for other conservation 
and preservation needs. By providing the full $1,440 million 
authorized this year for conservation programs in the Interior 
bill, the Congress maintains its commitment to the $12 billion 
in funding anticipated over the first six years of this 
initiative. This is roughly twice the amount which would likely 
have been provided under previous financing structures.
    The Minority was especially pleased that the Committee 
adopted on a bi-partisan basis an amendment adding $700 million 
in critically needed fiscal year 2002 supplemental funding to 
fight the catastrophic fires burning in many of the Western 
States. The 2002 fire season is shaping up to be one of the 
worst in recent memory. At the beginning of July more than 3 
million acres have burned, almost triple the average for this 
time of year. We believe the failure of the executive branch to 
request adequate funding for this emergency is irresponsible 
and we are pleased that the Committee has responded by adding 
to the bill the supplemental funding which will clearly be 
needed.
    While we have in these views attempted to indicate the many 
areas in which we are supportive of the bill, we must, however, 
express our consternation regarding the decision by the 
Committee to hold down funding for America's cultural 
agencies--the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the 
National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH). These agencies, 
which finance the country's small but critical efforts in 
support of cultural education and preservation, were cut by 
more than 40 percent in 1995 and, despite some progress in the 
last two years, for the most part have yet to recover. The NEA 
is funded in this bill at a level of $116.5 million, $46 
million below the 1995 level and in real dollars a reduction of 
almost one-third. The funding for the National Endowment for 
the Humanities is similarly inadequate in this bill.
    Last year, when the House considered the FY 2002 Interior 
bill, it approved a bi-partisan amendment to begin restoring 
federal support for these cultural agencies. The House at that 
time voted 221 to 193 in favor of adding $10 million to the NEA 
and $5 million to the NEH, the first increase to win final 
approval on a roll call vote since 1994. The Minority believes 
that this vote was a turning point in which the full House 
declared an end to the fight over federal funding for the arts 
and humanities begun in the early 1990's. It did so first 
because of the quality and the public support for these 
programs. But, it also did so because it accepted that the 
reforms instituted by the Congress had successfully dealt with 
the concerns of many in the public about federal support for 
controversial projects. These reforms include a significant 
broadening of grant support to more States and communities, an 
expanded and more publicly responsive advisory council, and 
controls to limit funding for controversial programs. The 
Minority will continue to look for sources of additional 
funding for our cultural agencies as the bill moves to the 
House floor.
    There are other areas beyond the cultural agencies where 
the Minority would support additional funds. In particular 
Indian health and education are high priority areas which need 
increased resources. But, as stated at the beginning of these 
views, we believe this legislation in balance is a good bill 
produced through an open and bi-partisan process. We believe it 
deserves an ``aye'' vote at final passage.
                                   Norm Dicks.
                                   David Obey.

                                  
