Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    106-222

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



 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 
                                  2000

                                _______
                                

  July 2, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______


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

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 2466]

    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, 2000. 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
                                                                     12
        U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.....................    10
                                                                     20
        National Park Service..............................    16
                                                                     30
        U.S. Geological Survey.............................    22
                                                                     50
        Minerals Management Service........................    25
                                                                     55
        Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 
            Enforcement....................................    27
                                                                     57
        Bureau of Indian Affairs...........................    30
                                                                     58
        Departmental Offices...............................    36
                                                                     64
        General Provisions.................................    44
                                                                     69
Related Agencies:
        Forest Service, USDA...............................    56
                                                                     70
        Department of Energy...............................    68
                                                                     94
        Clean Coal Technology..............................    68
                                                                     94
        Fossil Energy Research and Development.............    69
                                                                     94
        Alternative Fuels Production.......................    69
                                                                     98
        Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves.............    70
                                                                     98
        Energy Conservation................................    70
                                                                     99
        Economic Regulation................................    71
                                                                    104
        Strategic Petroleum Reserve........................    71
                                                                    105
        Energy Information Administration..................    71
                                                                    105
Indian Health Service, DHHS................................    74
                                                                    106
Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation................    81
                                                                    113
Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and 
    Arts Development.......................................
                                                                    113
Smithsonian Institution....................................    82
                                                                    114
National Gallery of Art....................................    85
                                                                    116
John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.............    86
                                                                    117
Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars...........    87
                                                                    118
National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities.........    87
                                                                    118
Commission of Fine Arts....................................    90
                                                                    121
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation..................    90
                                                                    122
National Capital Planning Commission.......................    90
                                                                    122
United States Holocaust Memorial Council...................    91
                                                                    123
Presidio Trust.............................................    91
                                                                    123
Title III--General Provisions..............................    92
                                                                    124

                   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........................................        14,058            59        14,057            57
Outlays.................................................        14,406            83        14,406            80
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Summary of the Bill

    The Committee has conducted extensive hearings on the 
programs and projects provided for in the Interior and Related 
Agencies Appropriations bill for 2000. The hearings are 
contained in 11 published volumes totaling nearly 11,000 pages.
    During the course of the hearings, testimony was taken at 
23 hearings on 21 days from more than 500 witnesses, not only 
from agencies which come under the jurisdiction of the Interior 
Subcommittee, but also from Members of Congress, State and 
local government officials, and private citizens.
    The bill that is recommended for fiscal year 2000 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 2000   fiscal year 2000   budget estimates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I, Department of the Interior: New Budget             $7,768,930,000     $7,107,904,000      -$661,026,000
 (obligational) authority..............................
Title II, related agencies: New Budget (obligational)        7,497,207,000      6,996,705,000       -500,502,000
 authority.............................................
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Grand total, New Budget (obligational) authority.     15,266,137,000     14,104,609,000     -1,161,528,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  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 1999, these activities are 
estimated to total $3,205,223,000. The estimate for fiscal year 
2000 is $2,817,736,000.
    The following table reflects the total budget 
(obligational) authority contained both in this bill and in 
permanent appropriations for fiscal years 1999 and 2000.

        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES TOTAL BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEARS 1999-2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Item                            Fiscal year 1999   Fiscal year 2000        Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interior and related agencies appropriations bill......    $14,297,803,000    $14,104,609,000      -$193,194,000
Permanent appropriations, Federal funds................      2,262,702,000      2,242,275,000        -20,427,000
Permanent appropriations, trust funds..................        942,521,000        575,461,000       -367,060,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total budget authority...........................     17,503,026,000     16,922,345,000       -580,681,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Revenue Generated by Agencies in Bill

    The following tabulation indicates total new obligational 
authority to date for fiscal years 1998 and 1999, and the 
amount recommended in the bill for fiscal year 2000. It 
compares receipts generated by activities in this bill on an 
actual basis for fiscal year 1998 and on an estimated basis for 
fiscal years 1999 and 2000. The programs in this bill are 
estimated to generate $6.3 billion in revenues for the Federal 
Government in fiscal year 2000. Therefore, the expenditures in 
this bill will contribute to economic stability rather than 
inflation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Fiscal year--
                          Item                          --------------------------------------------------------
                                                                1998               1999               2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New obligational authority.............................    $14,109,493,000    $14,297,803,000    $14,104,609,000
Receipts:
    Department of the Interior.........................      7,786,883,000      7,645,151,000      5,643,179,000
    Forest Service.....................................        688,853,000        724,797,000        667,737,000
    Naval Petroleum Reserves...........................        178,254,000          4,774,000          4,489,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total receipts...................................      8,653,990,000      8,374,722,000      6,315,405,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   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 
2000, 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 2000.
    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.

                    Land and Water Conservation Fund

    Following is a comparison of the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund by agency. More specific information can be 
found in each agency's land acquisition account.

                                        LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Enacted fiscal    Estimated fiscal
                                                             year 1999          year 2000         Recommended
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assistance to States:
    Matching grants....................................                  0                  0                  0
    Administrative expenses............................               $500             $1,000               $500
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, assistance to States...................                500              1,000                500
                                                        ========================================================
Federal programs:
    Bureau of Land Management..........................             14,600             48,900             20,000
    Fish and Wildlife Service..........................             48,024             73,632             42,000
    National Park Service..............................            147,425            171,468            101,500
    Forest Service.....................................            117,918            118,000              1,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Federal programs.......................            327,967            412,000            164,500
                                                        ========================================================
      Total LWCF.......................................            328,467            413,000            165,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee has included $165,000,000 to cover the land 
acquisition needs of the Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and the Forest 
Service.

                            Indian Programs

    Spending for Indian services by the Federal Government in 
total is included in the following table:

                                       FEDERAL FUNDING OF INDIAN PROGRAMS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                    Fiscal year
                        Budget authority                            Fiscal year     Fiscal year    2000, budget
                                                                   1998, actual    1999, enacted     estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Agriculture.......................................        $168,032        $170,990        $178,359
Department of Commerce..........................................           4,606           4,606           5,256
Department of Defense...........................................          16,000          16,000          16,000
Department of Justice...........................................         119,065         186,760         221,949
Department of Education.........................................       1,386,000       1,529,000       1,524,900
Department of HHS...............................................       2,385,144       2,570,164       2,791,933
Department of HUD...............................................         672,000         693,000         693,000
Department of Veterans Affairs..................................             515             515             520
Department of the Interior......................................       1,993,146       2,007,184       2,232,210
Department of Labor.............................................          84,655          88,655          78,829
Department of Transportation....................................         228,091         252,584         250,071
Environmental Protection Agency.................................         139,136         173,884         167,434
Small Business Administration...................................               0               0           1,000
Smithsonian Institution.........................................          49,000          41,000          54,000
Army Corps of Engineers.........................................          22,939          20,050          19,796
Other Independent Agencies......................................          21,850          20,158          21,250
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................       7,290,179       7,774,550       8,256,507
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        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.

  Committee Recommendations Compared With the Administration's Budget 
                                Request

    The Committee has carefully examined the needs of the many 
agencies covered by this bill in the context of the budget 
allocation. Unfortunately, the Administration ignored the 
budget agreement in submitting its fiscal year 2000 budget 
request. For the Interior bill alone, the request exceeded the 
fiscal year 1999 allocation by $1 billion. The Administration 
proposed to fund much of this increase by spending money we 
don't have--namely, tax increases that are not in law and not 
even under serious consideration. The Administration has not 
submitted legislative proposals that would yield the additional 
revenues that it proposes to spend in the fiscal year 2000 
budget request.
    Lands Legacy.--The Committee has not included funding 
requested in support of the Administration's proposed new $1 
billion ``Lands Legacy'' program. The proposal is troubling for 
several reasons. Most of these funds would not benefit Federal 
agencies. They involve the direct pass through of funds to 
States, cities and private entities. The Federal land 
management agencies, by the Administration's own estimate, have 
a backlog of maintenance needs totaling $15,000,000,000. Also, 
the Committee notes that forty-nine of the States had budget 
surpluses in fiscal year 1998, many of them quite large, and 
all States project a surplus in fiscal year 1999.
    In the National Park Service, the Committee does not agree 
with the additional $200,000,000 and sixty new FTEs for State 
land and water grants and new community assistance. The 
Committee questions the judgment of the Administration in 
making this recommendation at a time when the National Park 
Service suffers from serious backlog maintenance needs and 
operational shortfalls. At a time when the parks are being 
cited for OHSA and State health violations for facilities that 
are old and failing, it seems rather shortsighted to hire an 
additional sixty FTEs whose function is to disperse hundreds of 
millions in taxpayer dollars to the States. The Committee 
acknowledges that the Stateside grants are authorized under the 
Land and Water Conservation Act and that it may be appropriate 
at some time in the future, when the Federal lands and 
facilities are in better repair, to provide funding which 
focuses attention on critical land purchases for outdoor public 
recreation at State and local levels. However, the Committee 
continues to be concerned by the reluctance of the States and 
other supporters of the program to eliminate certain uses of 
these funds, such as public marinas, swimming pools and golf 
courses, which should not be financed with Federal funds.
    Likewise, the large increases proposed in the Fish and 
Wildlife Service for the Lands Legacy program have not been 
approved. In particular, the Committee is concerned that the 
Administration proposed to increase the Cooperative Endangered 
Species Conservation Fund from $14,000,000 in fiscal year 1999 
to $80,000,000 in fiscal year 2000. This increase would be 
derived from the Land and Water Conservation Fund rather than 
the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund. The 
Committee neither endorses this dual funding mechanism nor such 
a large increase in funding without more substantial 
justification. The Committee has asked the General Accounting 
Office to examine the land acquisition programs within the 
Service and believes strongly that any substantial increases in 
those programs should not be made before the GAO review has 
been completed.
    The Lands Legacy request for the Forest Service follows a 
similar pattern: large increases for grants to States and other 
entities that have little relationship to the core Federal 
investments or responsibilities of the Forest Service. The 
Committee has not funded the Administration request to transfer 
$10,000,000 of stewardship incentives funding to the USDA for 
rural cooperative loans: such requests should be made directly 
to the appropriations subcommittee responsible for that agency, 
not the Interior Subcommittee. Similarly, the massive increase, 
in excess of 600 per cent, requested for the forest legacy 
program is not as high a priority as the huge backlogs in 
deferred maintenance, shortfalls in basic habitat, watershed 
and forest restoration funding, and the great needs for 
recreation and wildfire management support in direct service to 
the American public. The Committee also has not provided the 
requested funding of $118,000,000 for new land acquisition 
given the great needs mentioned above and the fact that 
unallocated acquisition funds are still available from last 
year.
    Department of Energy.--The Administration focuses much of 
its proposed budget increase on the Department of Energy 
programs in this bill, including global warming/climate change 
programs. The Committee believes that the Department of Energy 
needs to focus and streamline its programs and to work with the 
States and industry in doing so. More programs need to be 
eliminated or consolidated so that the research we do conduct 
yields timely and meaningful results. The Department of 
Energy's attitude toward research has been that almost 
everything that has been done in the past should be continued 
or expanded, and funding for new research programs should be 
added on top of that. This attitude is continued in the fiscal 
year 2000 budget request for energy conservation. The 
Department of Energy needs to do a better job of leveraging 
State and private industry money for the most essential 
research needs.
    Endangered Species Act.--Finally, the Administration 
requested large increases for Endangered Species Act programs. 
The Committee believes the Administration should submit a 
legislative proposal for reauthorizing that Act. The proposal 
should address needed reforms in ESA.

                  South Florida Restoration Initiative

    The Congress, and specifically this subcommittee, became 
involved and committed to the South Florida Restoration 
Initiative because the Administration assured us that the main 
goal was to restore the natural hydrological functions to 
Everglades National Park and other natural areas in southern 
Florida. This effort must include a guaranteed water supply 
including appropriate timing and distribution of water flow as 
well as significant improvements to water quality.
    The Congress has appropriated over $1 billion over the last 
five years demonstrating its commitment to the Administration's 
stated goal. Yet, a disturbing fact, raised by both the 
scientific and environmental communities involved in this 
effort, is that there is no true environmental restoration in 
the current plan because there is no guaranteed water supply.
    At several oversight hearings this year all of the major 
parties including the Department of the Interior, the Army 
Corps of Engineers and the Florida Water Management Districts 
all stated for the record that the project, when completed, 
will make available significant new and sustained water supply 
to the natural areas. We hope they are right, but whenever this 
Committee has attempted to get these parties to provide 
specific information that can be codified in permanent law we 
are given excuses for why it can't be done.
    The Committee understands that there are other factors at 
work here. There are competing interests, specifically the 
agriculture industry (including the largest sugar corporations 
in the country) and major development interests. Florida is one 
of the fastest growing states in the nation. These interests 
want to ensure a balanced approach that includes the concerns 
of their own industries, and the Committee understands this 
fact. However, the Committee is deeply concerned about the 
apparent lack of interest on the part of the Secretary of the 
Interior to ensure that his responsibilities, which are to 
protect the Federal parks, refuges and species which come under 
this jurisdiction, receive adequate protection. The Department 
seems confused and conflicted between its role of chief 
coordinator of this initiative and of protector of Federal 
lands and the environment.
    This Committee has asked the Secretary of the Interior for 
the past four years at public hearings to respond to the 
question: ``Aren't you concerned that when this project is 
complete, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Florida Water 
Management Districts will control the water supply and not the 
U.S. Department of the Interior?'' In an artful way, the 
Secretary has acknowledged that this is indeed a concern. He 
also agrees, when pushed, that the lack of guaranteed water 
supply, which will ensure true environmental restoration, is a 
concern. The Committee is still waiting for the Administration 
to present proposed solutions to these two serious problems to 
this Committee. The Committee has recommended bill language 
under the National Park Service land acquisition account that 
makes funding for land acquisition for South Florida subject to 
these conditions.
    The Committee understands that this is a partnership and 
that concessions have to be made, but it is unreasonable to 
expect those who are dedicated to the full and complete 
restoration of the natural systems in South Florida to continue 
to devote limited resources to a $10 billion plus initiative 
which fails to provide essential assurances that this essential 
goal will be met.

                  Backlog Maintenance and Improvements

    In its fiscal year 2000 recommendations for the various 
programs in the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations 
bill, the Committee has continued its emphasis on ``taking care 
of what we have in the public trust''. The budget submitted by 
the Administration focused on new and expanded programs and did 
not adequately address maintenance and operational shortfalls 
in many cases. The Committee understands that new initiatives 
and new land acquisition and construction projects make for 
``good press'', and most of these proposals are worthy of 
consideration. However, in a constrained budget climate, 
funding for day-to-day operations and maintenance requirements 
must take higher precedence.
    The Committee has held oversight hearings on the 
maintenance backlog and construction programs in the land 
management agencies over the past two years. Participants at 
those hearings included officials from the General Accounting 
Office (GAO), the Inspectors General (IG) of the Departments of 
the Interior and Agriculture, the Bureau of Land Management, 
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park 
Service, and the Forest Service. Those hearings demonstrated 
that none of the land management agencies had an adequate 
program for categorizing and addressing maintenance and 
construction needs. The GAO and IG officials all testified that 
the maintenance backlog lists lacked credibility and, in some 
cases, were totally unacceptable. Neither the National Park 
Service nor the Forest Service were able to demonstrate that 
they had any definitive idea of what their backlog maintenance 
needs were. The systems in use did not have standardized 
definitions of what constitutes backlog and what constitutes 
routine maintenance. Nor did they have acceptable methodologies 
for establishing priorities or estimating costs. The National 
Park Service system included major construction and land 
acquisition projects in the maintenance backlog.
    Some improvements have been made, but the Committee expects 
the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture and the four 
land management agencies to demonstrate continued improvements 
in this area in fiscal year 2000. They also should attempt to 
standardize definitions and approaches across agencies to the 
maximum extent practicable. This is an issue that cries out for 
management attention at the highest levels of the Departments 
and the agencies. The Committee will continue to monitor 
progress in this area and expects to see accurate, clear, 
complete and consistent explanations of needs in the fiscal 
year 2001 budget submissions. The Departments of the Interior 
and Agriculture need to demonstrate that they are spending the 
taxpayers' dollars wisely and that they are exercising 
appropriate fiscal constraint in carrying out programs for, and 
financed by, the American public.

        Federal Land Highway Program Funding Support to Agencies

    The Committee is aware of the vast needs of the land 
management agencies under its jurisdiction. The Committee has 
placed strong emphasis on managing these resources and has 
consistently provided significant increases for backlog and 
other maintenance needs. The Committee notes that, in addition 
to the major increases provided by the Committee in this bill, 
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century provides 
over $4 billion in additional funds for road construction and 
repair in the National Parks, Wildlife Refuges, Indian 
Reservations, and other public lands through the year 2003.

                 Recreational Fee Demonstration Program

    The Committee continues to monitor closely the Recreational 
Fee Demonstration Program authorized in fiscal year 1996 and 
now fully operational. The Committee is pleased with the 
progress to date and the improving trend of agency performance 
and inter-agency collaboration. This pilot program has made a 
major impact on the ability of the National Park Service to 
tackle backlog maintenance needs, and it is beginning to show 
good results for the other agencies in many locations. The 
Committee remains committed to using fee demonstration program 
funds, in addition to continued annual appropriations, for 
backlog maintenance and other special needs. The Committee 
remains enthusiastic about experimentation with new approaches, 
especially the entrepreneurship displayed by the Forest 
Service. The demonstration projects have not all been 
successful, but we are learning that public acceptance of 
individual projects changes over time. In general, the public 
seems willing to pay fees when they know, and see, the on-the-
ground results at the site where the fees are collected. In 
addition to addressing deferred maintenance items, we are 
seeing substantial reductions in vandalism, increased public 
safety, wildfire reduction, and enhanced visitor experiences 
through a variety of visitor services that are now possible. 
The Committee encourages the agencies to increase interagency 
projects and to develop additional mechanisms to make the fee 
collection more ``seamless'' to the public.
    Each of the four agencies has had a slightly different 
experience. The program has had greatest fiscal impact on the 
National Park Service because of the preexisting infrastructure 
and design of park units for fee collecting. The National Park 
Service collected $136.8 million from 100 projects in fiscal 
year 1998 and anticipates revenue collections of $135 million 
during fiscal year 1999. Many deferred maintenance projects 
have already been accomplished, and major parks have a 
reasonable expectation that they may finally be able to catch 
up with unmet needs accumulated over decades. The Forest 
Service has 72 fee demonstration projects. During fiscal year 
1998, the Forest Service collected $20.8 million; fiscal year 
1999 collections are expected to be $24.5 million. The fact 
that the collecting unit retains the majority of the funds 
collected is the single largest selling point with the public. 
Public acceptance also has improved as visible improvements are 
made with fee dollars, and the public is becoming accustomed to 
paying for quality experiences on the National Forests and 
Grasslands. Fee dollars are being focused on long-term backlog 
maintenance problems and local enhancements, such as improved 
toilets, increased safety and fire patrols, interpretation, and 
road, trail, and campsite maintenance. The Bureau of Land 
Management approved 68 projects and collected fees of $3.5 
million during fiscal year 1998. In fiscal year 1999, BLM 
expects to collect $6 million. The BLM is primarily allocating 
these additional funds to high priority backlog-maintenance 
needs. The principal lesson learned to date by the BLM is to 
work with local communities and users when determining the 
kinds of services desired and the corresponding fee charged. 
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service collected $3.1 million from 
77 projects in fiscal year 1998. These funds have been used to 
address a variety of backlog maintenance and one-time 
operational needs such as improving trail guides and visitor 
facilities. In fiscal year 1999 the Service estimates 
collections totaling $4 million at 100 participating units.

              Allocating Congressional Funding Priorities

    The Committee is 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. In the future, 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.

                     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. It is a little known fact that recreation in the 
National Forests exceeds that of the National Parks. The Forest 
Service manages 192 million acres, has over 850 million 
visitors a year, and attracts 125 thousand volunteers. By 
contrast the National Park Service manages 83 million acres, 
has about 288 million visitors, and attracts 112 thousand 
volunteers. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages 94 
million acres, has 30 million visitors annually and attracts 31 
thousand volunteers. The Bureau of Land Management has the 
largest land base of the land management agencies with 264 
million acres. BLM has about 65 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.

                       Women and Minority Hiring

    The Committee continues to support equal employment hiring 
practices in all the agencies covered by this bill. The 
Committee included sizable increases in the Department of the 
Interior budget several years ago to encourage greater 
sensitivity to the need for a diverse workforce. Those funds 
have remained in the base budget ever since. The Committee is 
concerned about the Department of the Interior's request for 
additional funds in fiscal year 2000 for ``diversity 
initiatives''. The Committee reminds the Department that the 
law prohibits discrimination and additional funding should not 
be required to enforce that law. The Committee is concerned 
that, too often, the emphasis on hiring minorities and women is 
placed on the equal employment opportunity, civil rights, and 
other administrative offices and not on other program offices. 
The Committee expects the Department to ensure that diversity 
extends to all offices and, just as program offices should be 
sensitive to hiring qualified women and minorities at all 
levels of program operations and management, administrative 
offices should also implement a balanced staffing strategy. 
Qualifications and demonstrated ability should always be the 
determining factors for any position. Management training 
should stress EEO responsibilities and every manager should be 
held accountable for complying with EEO policies. This should 
be an integral part of agency operations and not the subject of 
special initiatives.

                  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 
264 million acres of the Nation's public lands and for 
management of 300 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, with an estimated 65 million visits totaling 570 
million visitor hours of recreation use on the public lands 
under the Bureau's management.
    Under the multiple-use and ecosystem management concept the 
Bureau administers the grazing of approximately 4.3 million 
head of livestock on some 164 million acres of public land 
ranges, and manages over 43,000 wild horses and burros, some 
264 million acres of wildlife habitat, and over 150,000 miles 
of fisheries habitat. Grazing receipts are estimated to be 
about $14.2 million in fiscal year 2000, compared to an 
estimated $14.3 million in fiscal year 1999 and actual receipts 
of $15 million in fiscal year 1998. The Bureau also administers 
about 4 million acres of commercial forest lands through the 
``Management of lands and resources'' and ``Oregon and 
California grant lands'' appropriations. Timber receipts 
(including salvage) are estimated to be $80.4 million in fiscal 
year 2000 compared to estimated receipts of $65.8 million in 
fiscal year 1999 and actual receipts of $86.5 million in fiscal 
year 1998. The Bureau has an active program of soil and 
watershed management on 172 million acres in the lower 48 
States and 92 million acres in Alaska. Practices such as 
revegetation, protective fencing, and water developments 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, 1999...........................      $612,511,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       641,100,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       632,068,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       +19,557,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -9,032,000


    The Committee recommends $632,068,000 for management of 
lands and resources, an increase of $19,557,000 from the fiscal 
year 1999 enacted level and a decrease of $9,032,000 from the 
budget request. As a result of significant budgetary 
constraints arising from the balanced budget agreements, 
limited funding has been provided to address the Bureau's 
uncontrollable cost increases so as to provide the same level 
of service to the public as that provided during fiscal year 
1999. In addition to uncontrollable cost increases, the 
Committee has provided limited funding increases for priority 
programs, especially where the Bureau is required to expend 
additional resources as a result of litigation as is the case 
with grazing permits, or threatened and endangered species 
programs, or where the Bureau is required to undertake new or 
expanded activities, which is the case with the acquisition of 
the Headwaters forest. Within the recommended amount the 
Committee has provided $2,500,000 to the National Fish and 
Wildlife Foundation to leverage funding with non-Federal 
partners for innovative on-the-ground projects for wildlife and 
fisheries, watershed, and other activities affecting bureau 
lands. The Committee has also clarified the Foundation's bill 
language. The Committee also approves the Bureau's request to 
change its budget structure and establish separate 
subactivities for annual and deferred maintenance.
    It is the understanding of the Committee that the Bureau is 
reviewing the completeness and depth of the information in its 
land use planning and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
review documents. This review is the result of a growing 
concern on the part of the Bureau's managers that many land use 
plans do not currently reflect new or revised legal mandates 
and resource conditions such as revised air and water quality 
standards, endangered species listings, and critical watershed 
designations. These documents, along with the mandated NEPA 
reviews, are used by the Bureau to evaluate and authorize a 
variety of land and resource allocation decisions related to 
commercial, recreation, conservation, and land health 
activities. Recently several of the Bureau's decisions relating 
to these types of activities have been challenged in the 
courts, often resulting in delays in authorizing resource 
management actions, growing backlogs in use authorizations, and 
growing costs.
    The Committee expects the Bureau to submit as part of its 
fiscal year 2001 budget request the results of its ongoing 
analysis and review into the required level of land use 
planning and NEPA review actions the Bureau will have to 
undertake in order to correct identified deficiencies in these 
areas. The Committee also expects the Bureau to include in its 
request the level of funds and other resources that would be 
required to address these problem areas.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:



    Land resources.--The Committee recommends $155,500,000 for 
land resources, a decrease of $5,880,000 from the budget 
request and an increase of $10,586,000 above the 1999 level, 
including increases above the 1999 level of $4,137,000 for 
fixed costs, $1,829,000 for standards and guidelines, 
$2,000,000 to address the growing problem of invasive plants on 
public lands, $1,000,000 to address management issues for the 
new Headwaters forest acquisition, $1,000,000 for the San Pedro 
Partnership, $600,000 for the joint BLM and National Park 
Service problems associated with the removal of burros from 
National Park Service lands in the California desert, and 
$20,000 for a cooperative BLM and tribal cultural survey.
    Within the funds provided for soil, water, and air 
management, $1,000,000 is provided for the San Pedro 
Partnership initiative in Cochise County, Arizona. This 
represents an increase of Bureau resources dedicated to this 
high priority initiative. This area represents the most 
extensive riparian ecosystem remaining in the desert southwest 
with the highest bird diversity of any place of its size in the 
country. The Committee fully supports this multi-year 
cooperative effort to maintain and restore these valuable and 
ecologically significant lands.
    The Committee is concerned that a grazing program for the 
Ft. Stanton Area of Critical Environmental Concern has not 
begun. This land has been historically grazed and for years 
long-term grazing research was conducted on many of the 
pastures. The Committee requests a report from the Bureau on 
its intentions for this land, including an explanation as to 
why a grazing program cannot be conducted under the Taylor 
Grazing Act. Further, the report should address the prospect of 
using the land for additional wildlife and grazing research.
    The Committee requests a report from the Bureau regarding 
the Organ Mountains located near Las Cruces, New Mexico. The 
report, due by May 1, 2000, should provide data for resources, 
land ownership, and issues and conflicts that pertain to 
current and future management of the Organ Mountains and 
related Federal lands from the Texas border to the northern 
border of Dona Ana County.
    The Committee understands that the Tohono O'odham tribe has 
a strong interest in the area of Boboquivara Peak and Mountain 
for cultural and religious reasons, and would like to see these 
lands removed from the National Wilderness Preservation System 
and placed into trust status. The Committee encourages the 
tribe to work with the Bureau of Land Management and the Bureau 
of Indian Affairs to look at alternative land management 
options. In the interim, the Committee has provided the Bureau 
with an additional $20,000 to conduct a cultural survey of 
Boboquivara Peak and the eastern portion of the mountain. The 
remaining cost of this survey is to be provided by the tribe.
    Wildlife and fisheries.--The Committee recommends 
$34,638,000 for wildlife and fisheries, a decrease of $50,000 
below the budget request and an increase of $2,875,000 above 
the 1999 level, including increases above the 1999 level of 
$875,000 for fixed costs, $1,000,000 for cost share programs 
through the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, $500,000 for 
wildlife management, and $500,000 for fisheries management.
    The Committee has provided an additional $1,000,000 to the 
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation for cost-share projects 
benefiting the conservation of Bureau lands. The Committee has 
also included bill language clarifying that funding for the 
Foundation is to be advanced in a lump sum and that these funds 
be available for the highest priority projects that benefit 
wildlife, fisheries, soil and water, forest, rangeland or other 
public land resources.
    Threatened and endangered species.--The Committee 
recommends $18,903,000 for threatened and endangered species, 
an increase of $50,000 above the budget request and an increase 
of $1,484,000 above the 1999 level, including increases above 
the 1999 level of $484,000 for fixed costs, and $1,000,000 to 
address the growing backlog of consultations the Bureau must 
undertake under the Endangered Species Act.
    Recreation management.--The Committee recommends 
$51,403,000 for recreation management, a decrease of $350,000 
below the budget request and an increase of $1,328,000 above 
the 1999 level for fixed costs.
    Energy and minerals.--The Committee recommends $76,427,000 
for energy and minerals including Alaska minerals. This is an 
increase of $2,050,000 above the budget request and an increase 
of $3,391,000 above the 1999 level, including increases above 
the 1999 level of $1,891,000 for fixed costs, and $2,500,000 to 
address the growing backlog of coalbed methane permits, and a 
decrease of $1,000,000 for Alaska minerals.
    The Committee has provided an additional $2,500,000 for the 
processing of permits for coalbed methane activities. The 
Committee has included bill language under this account that 
makes the use of these funds contingent upon a written 
agreement between the coal mine operator and the gas producer 
prior to permit issuance if the permitted activity is in an 
area where there is a conflict between coal mining operations 
and coalbed methane production.
    Realty and ownership management.--The Committee recommends 
$73,107,000 for realty and ownership management, a decrease of 
$2,000,000 below the budget request and a decrease of $475,000 
below the 1999 level, including an increase above the 1999 
level of $1,925,000 for fixed costs, and a decrease of 
$2,400,000 for Alaska conveyance.
    Resource protection and maintenance.--The Committee 
recommends $33,795,000 for resource protection and maintenance, 
a decrease of $300,000 from the budget request and a decrease 
of $40,893,000 below the 1999 level, including an increase 
above the 1999 level of $865,000 for fixed costs, and a 
transfer of $41,758,000 as a result in shifting maintenance 
funding to the new transportation and facilities maintenance 
activity as proposed by the Bureau.
    Transportation and facilities maintenance.--The Committee 
recommends $46,304,000 for transportation and facilities 
maintenance, a decrease of $2,552,000 below the budget request 
and an increase of $46,304,000 above the 1999 level, including 
increases of $1,098,000 for fixed costs, $1,000,000 for annual 
maintenance, $2,448,000 for backlog maintenance, and a transfer 
of $41,758,000 into this new activity.
    Because the Committee places such a high priority on 
Federal agencies maintaining their infrastructure, the 
Department of the Interior and the bureaus have begun to focus 
their attention on addressing the serious problems associated 
with the growing backlog of maintenance projects. To address 
this issue the Committee has agreed to establish this new 
budget activity, and even though the Committee once again is 
faced with declining budgetary resources it has provided an 
increase that will allow the Bureau to continue to address its 
backlog maintenance needs.
    Land and resource information systems.--The Committee 
recommends $19,130,000 for land resource information systems, 
the same as the budget request and a decrease of $8,786,000 
below the 1999 level.
    Mining law administration.--The Committee recommends 
$33,529,000 for mining law administration. This activity is 
supported by offsetting fees equal to the amount made 
available.
    Workforce and organizational support.--The Committee 
recommends $122,861,000 for workforce and organizational 
support, the same as the budget request and an increase of 
$3,743,000 above the 1999 level for fixed costs.
    The Committee once again commends the Bureau's efforts to 
leverage its funds with non-Federal partners through its 
challenge cost share (CCS) program. The Committee concurs with 
BLM's current policy of not using CCS funds for purposes other 
than establishing joint activities with tribal, State, and 
private partners. Because each Federal dollar available for 
cost sharing results in two or more dollars available for on-
the-ground activities, the Committee directs that a cap of 10 
percent be placed on allowable BLM internal charges against CCS 
funds. As a result, at least 90 percent of the funds 
appropriated for CCS shall be available for matching 
partnerships at the field level.
    In order to enhance land management and research efforts, 
the Committee encourages the Bureau of Land Management to work 
with experts from Weber State University, who have experience 
and expressed interest in the development of computer-based 
remote sensing and GIS land management systems for the BLM.

                        wildland fire management




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $286,895,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       305,850,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       292,399,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +5,504,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -13,451,000


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $292,399,000 
for wildland fire management, which is an increase of 
$5,504,000 from the 1999 level and a decrease of $13,451,000 
from the budget request.
    The appropriation includes $162,399,000 for preparedness 
and fire use, including an increase above the 1999 level of 
$5,550,000 for fixed costs. The Committee has provided 
$130,000,000 for suppression activities. The Committee's 
recommendation funds Interior at approximately 79 percent of 
the Most Efficient Level for preparedness. Within the funds 
provided for wildland fire management $9,300,000 is available 
for renovation or construction of fire facilities.

                    central hazardous materials fund




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        11,350,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        10,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -1,350,000


    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 $10,000,000 for the central 
hazardous materials fund, which is the same as the 1999 level 
and $1,350,000 below the budget request.

                              construction




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $10,997,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         8,350,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        11,100,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          +103,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        +2,750,000


    The Committee recommends $11,100,000 for construction, 
which is an increase of $103,000 above the 1999 level and 
$2,750,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee has provided increases to the budget request 
that include $2,500,000 to initiate the final phase of 
construction for the National Historic Trails Interpretive 
Center in Casper, Wyoming. The total cost to the Federal 
government of this project is $5,000,000 with the State and 
local government contributing any remaining costs. The 
Committee has also provided $50,000 for Trona Pinnacles, CA, 
and $200,000 for Amboy Crater, CA.

                       payments in lieu of taxes




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $125,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       125,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       125,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    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 local governments may be 
receiving. Payments received may be used by the recipients for 
any governmental purpose.
    The Committee recommends $125,000,000 for PILT, the same as 
the budget request and the 1999 level.

                            land acquisition




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $14,600,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        48,900,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        20,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +5,400,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -28,900,000


    The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for land acquisition, 
an increase of $5,400,000 above the enacted level and 
$28,900,000 below the fiscal year 2000 request. This amount 
includes $16,500,000 for line item projects, $500,000 for 
emergencies and hardships and $3,000,000 for acquisition 
management.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:

                                                               Committee
        Area and State                                    recommendation
Cerbat Foothills (AZ)...................................        $500,000
La Cienega ACEC (NM)....................................       1,000,000
Otay Mountains/Kuchamaa HCP (CA)........................       1,000,000
Rock Creek Watershed (Escure Ranch) (WA)................       2,500,000
Santa Rosa Mountains NSA (CA)...........................       1,000,000
Spring Gulch (WY).......................................       5,000,000
Upper Missouri National WSR (MT)........................       5,000,000
Upper Snake/South Fork Snake River (ID).................         500,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal..........................................      16,500,000
Emergency/hardship/inholdings...........................         500,000
Acquisition management..................................       3,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................      20,000,000

                   oregon and california grant lands




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $97,037,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       101,650,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        99,225,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +2,188,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -2,425,000


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


    The Committee recommends $99,225,000 for the Oregon and 
California grant lands, a decrease of $2,425,000 from the 
budget request and an increase of $2,188,000 above the 1999 
level, including increases above the 1999 level of $2,188,000 
for fixed costs. 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, 1999...........................       $10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        10,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        10,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 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, 1999...........................        $8,055,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         8,800,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         8,800,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          +745,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation of 
$8,800,000, the budget request, for service charges, deposits, 
and forfeitures. This account uses the revenues 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, 1999...........................        $8,800,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         7,700,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         7,700,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        -1,100,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation of 
$7,700,000, the budget estimate, 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 townsites. 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 94 million acres across the 
United States, encompassing a 516-unit National Wildlife Refuge 
System, additional wildlife and wetlands areas, and 66 National 
Fish Hatcheries. A network of law enforcement agents and port 
inspectors enforce Federal laws for the protection of fish and 
wildlife.

                          resource management




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $661,136,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       724,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       710,700,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       +49,564,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -13,300,000


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


    The Committee recommends $710,700,000 for resource 
management, a decrease of $13,300,000 below the budget request 
and an increase of $49,564,000 above the fiscal year 1999 
level. The Committee has provided full funding for fixed cost 
increases and has continued to provide increases above current 
year levels to address the Service's large operations and 
maintenance backlogs.
    Ecological services.--The Committee recommends $188,100,000 
for ecological services, a decrease of $10,650,000 below the 
budget request and an increase of $4,192,000 above the fiscal 
year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request include 
decreases of $1,000,000 for candidate conservation, $1,000,000 
for listing, $5,000,000 for consultation, and $4,500,000 for 
recovery, which includes the transfer of $1,500,000 to the 
small landowner incentive program to consolidate private 
landowner partnership activities in that program. The increase 
of $1,500,000 in the landowner incentive program is the result 
of the recommended transfer from the recovery program. Other 
changes include a net decrease of $500,000 for habitat 
conservation, which includes decreases in project planning of 
$600,000 for FERC relicensing and $500,000 for the California 
Bay-Delta program; a decrease of $500,000 for the national 
wetlands inventory; and an increase of $1,100,000 in the 
partners for fish and wildlife program for bull trout 
conservation in Washington State. There is also a decrease of 
$150,000 for the environmental contaminants program.
    Refuges and wildlife.--The Committee recommends 
$327,119,000 for refuges and wildlife, which is equal to the 
budget request and an increase of $32,816,000 above the 1999 
level. A total of $1,000,000, the budget request, is 
recommended to continue the Salton Sea recovery program at the 
1999 level, contingent on matching funds from the State of 
California.
    Fisheries.--The Committee recommends $78,801,000 for 
fisheries, a decrease of $1,000,000 below the budget request 
and an increase of $5,239,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level. 
The decrease is for fish and wildlife management.
    General administration.--The Committee recommends 
$116,680,000 for general administration, a decrease of 
$1,650,000 below the budget request and an increase of 
$7,317,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level. Decreases to the 
budget request include $300,000 for central office 
administration/workforce diversity and $1,350,000 for 
international affairs.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Administration should submit a legislative 
reauthorization proposal for the Endangered Species Act, which 
realistically addresses needed reforms.
    2. Funding increases above the 1999 level for ESA programs 
should be directed toward on-the-ground programs and not toward 
so-called ESA reform efforts.
    3. The Service should consider the concerns of the 
Resources Committee in the House of Representatives when 
determining the distribution of ESA funding.
    4. Fixed cost increases and proposed internal transfers are 
included in full in the Committee's recommendations.
    5. Within the program increase above the 1999 level for 
candidate conservation, $400,000 is to continue cooperative 
efforts with the State of Alabama on conservation of the 
Alabama sturgeon.
    6. Within the program increase above the 1999 level for 
consultation, $1,000,000 is for the Sonoran Desert Conservation 
Plan. Local funding of $500,000 will also be made available for 
this program, which has been described by the Administration as 
including ``an astounding diversity of stakeholders and 
interested parties'' and of concern for ``18 Federally listed 
species, including the cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl, and 5 
candidate/proposed species in Pima County'' and ``about 50 
additional state species of concern.'' Secretary Babbitt told 
the Committee that this effort ``is the most exciting attempt 
anywhere in the United States to deal in a community based 
consensus building way with all these issues of open space, 
biological protection, growth.''
    7. The Service should carefully review the data in the 
refuge operating needs system (RONS); identify minimum 
operating needs; and separate those needs from the other 
legitimate needs in the system. The result should be a two-
tiered RONS system. The minimum needs portion should be 
directly related to the minimum staffing requirements 
identified by the Service at the request of the Committee.
    8. The California-Nevada operations office should be funded 
at the same level as fiscal year 1999, adjusted for fixed cost 
increases identified in the budget. Staffing of this office 
should remain at 9 FTEs.
    9. The program funding increases above the 1999 level are 
not specifically tied to individual initiatives in the 2000 
budget request. The Committee believes that the increases in 
funding above the base budget should be distributed based on 
priority needs of the Service. The Committee does not object to 
funding portions of the initiatives identified in the budget if 
the Service deems them to be top priorities. The Service should 
report to the Committee by October 30, 1999, following the 
established reprogramming procedures, on the specific 
activities it proposes to fund with the increases provided. 
Priorities should be based on sound science and chosen either 
through a competitive solicitation process and/or verified 
through outside expert review.
    10. The Committee does not object to increased staffing for 
refuge operations and maintenance consistent with the minimum 
staffing requirements determined by the Service. These staffing 
increases should be identified in the October 30 report as 
should any staffing increases in other Service programs. The 
Committee encourages the Service to minimize non-refuge 
staffing increases.
    11. The Service should consider combining the migratory 
bird land program with the North American wetlands program to 
achieve economies of scale with respect to program 
administration. The fiscal year 2001 budget request should 
address this issue.
    12. The Service should continue funding, at least at the 
fiscal year 1999 level, for the Upper Colorado River Basin 
program, the Peregrine Fund, the Northwest forest plan 
including the jobs in the woods program, and, in Washington 
State, the ecosystems conservation project, the regional 
fisheries enhancement program, and the Long Live the Kings 
salmon program.
    13. Within the increase above the 1999 level for the 
fisheries program, $500,000 is to maintain operations at 
existing hatcheries. The Service should perform a thorough 
review of, and develop a long-term strategy for, the fisheries 
program in coordination with the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation and other outside independent groups. The Committee 
believes strongly that the focus of the program should be 
habitat based rather than hatchery based and that mitigation 
work at hatcheries should be performed on a cost reimbursable 
basis.
    14. The Committee has received complaints about the 
handling of the grizzly bear program by the Service and expects 
the Service to ensure that full public participation is a 
cornerstone of the program.
    15. The Committee supports the efforts in New Mexico to 
enhance the habitat of the endangered silvery minnow and the 
blunt nosed shiner. The Service should use existing Federal 
water allocations in New Mexico to the maximum extent possible 
and work with the Bureau of Reclamation and the Army Corps of 
Engineers to enhance the habitat of these two species in 
compliance with the Endangered Species Act.
    16. The Committee has received many expressions of concern 
with respect to goose population problems, including problems 
with resident Canada geese. These problems involve the over-
population of snow geese, the problem with dusky Canada geese 
in the Pacific Northwest, and overabundance/nuisance problems 
with Canada geese in various areas of the country. The 
Committee expects the Service to develop a strategic plan for 
dealing with these problems nationwide and to report to the 
Congress on that plan by February 1, 2000. The fiscal year 2001 
budget request should include funds for implementing the plan. 
The Committee has recently become aware of a problem in and 
around the Horicon National Wildlife Refuge in Wisconsin and 
expects the Service to address this problem and problems at 
other refuges in its plan.
    17. The Committee is concerned about predation by Caspian 
Terns on outbound migrating juvenile salmon smolt in the 
Columbia River. The Committee understands that this problem has 
arisen because an island, formed with dredge material by the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, is being used by these birds as a 
nesting ground. Reported estimates are that these birds are 
consuming as much as 25 percent of all salmon smolt coming down 
the river. The Committee is aware of the pilot program put in 
place by the Caspian Tern Working Group and the progress that 
has been made in addressing the predation problem. Because the 
Service is the Federal entity with jurisdiction over migratory 
birds, the Committee believes the Service should take a more 
active role in mitigating the impact of Caspian Terns on 
endangered smolt and urges the Service to use migratory bird 
management funds to develop a mitigation plan, in conjunction 
with the Caspian Tern Working Group, that will include, but not 
be limited to, transporting these birds to areas more in line 
with their natural habitat. The Service should brief the 
Committee on the progress of this effort at least on a semi-
annual basis, with the first briefing in November 1999.
    18. The Service should work with the Army Corps of 
Engineers and the National Park Service to ensure timely data 
collection and analysis in support of the Fire Island 
Reformulation Study and the Fire Island Interim Project.
    Bill language.--The Committee has included bill language, 
as requested by the Administration, capping the amount of 
funding available for certain endangered species listing 
programs. The amount for fiscal year 2000 is $6,532,000. 
Language to cap funding for critical habitat designation, as 
requested by the Administration, has not been included.
    Bill language also is included to permit the retention and 
use of funds from reimbursable agreements with private 
entities. This is a clarification of language included in the 
fiscal year 1999 Act, which makes it clear that the Committee 
intends these funds to be available for use by the Service. 
Language also is included to allow limited advance payments 
under cooperative agreements in order to permit obligation of 
funds for reimbursable agreements with non-Federal government 
entities in advance of payments from such entities. The Service 
is encouraged to partner with States, local governments and 
tribes to leverage scarce Federal dollars. The Committee 
expects the Service to use this advance obligation authority 
sparingly and to cite it, and include the reasons why it is 
necessary, in any partnership agreement for which it is to be 
used. Further, to use this authority, the Director must make a 
finding in writing that (1) the agreement will result in 
specific national benefits to the mission of the Service; (2) 
the partner, based on past history and fiscal credit 
worthiness, will pay its share of the agreement in a timely 
manner; and (3) the agreement has been signed by the 
appropriate governmental official with authority to commit his 
or her organization to the payments in the agreement without 
qualification.

                              construction




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $88,065,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        43,569,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        43,933,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       -44,132,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................          +364,000


    The Committee recommends $43,933,000 for construction, an 
increase of $364,000 above the fiscal year 2000 budget request 
and a decrease of $44,132,000 below the fiscal year 1999 level.
    The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
funds:

                                            [in thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Budget       Committee
                 Project                           Description            request    recommendation   Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 National Fish Hatcheries in New England  Water treatment                    1,803          1,803             0
                                            improvements.
Alchesay/Williams Creek NFH, AZ..........  Environmental pollution              373            373             0
                                            control.
Anchorage OAS, AK........................  Hangar--phase 1............          536            536             0
Bear River NWR, UT.......................  Dikes/water control                  450            450             0
                                            structures.
Bear River NWR, UT.......................  Education/visitor center...            0          1,500         1,500
Brazoria NWR, TX.........................  Replace Walker Bridge......          277            277             0
Cabo Rojo NWR, PR........................  Replace office building....          639            639             0
Chase Lake NWR, ND.......................  Construct vehicle shop.....          625            625             0
Chincoteague NWR, VA.....................  Headquarters/visitor center        1,000          1,000             0
Cross Creeks NWR, TN.....................  5 bridges/water control            1,500          1,500             0
                                            structures.
Dexter NFH, NM...........................  Irrigation wells...........            0            524           524
Genoa NFH, WI............................  Water supply system........        1,717          1,717             0
Hagerman NFH, ID.........................  Replace main hatchery              1,000          1,000             0
                                            building.
Hatchie NWR,TN...........................  Log Landing Slough Bridge..          284            284             0
Hatchie NWR,TN...........................  Loop Road/Bear Creek Bridge          367            367             0
Havasu NWR, AZ...........................  Replace/rehabilitate 3               409            409             0
                                            bridges.
Innoko NWR, AK...........................  Hangar--phase 1............          129            129             0
J.N. Ding Darling NWR, FL................  Construction of exhibits...            0            750           750
Lake Thibadeau NWR, MT...................  Lake Thibadeau diversion             250            250             0
                                            dam.
Little White Salmon NFH, WA..............  Replace upper raceways.....        3,990          3,990             0
Mattamuskeet NWR, NC.....................  Structural columns in Lodge          600            600             0
Mattamuskeet NWR, NC.....................  Refuge sewage system.......          400            400             0
McKinney Lake NFH, NC....................  Dam safety construction....          600            600             0
Mississippi River Discovery Center, IA...  Construction of exhibits...            0            300           300
Natchitoches NFH, LA.....................  Aeration & electrical                750            750             0
                                            system.
National Eagle & Wildlife Repository.....  Eagle processing laboratory          176            176             0
National Eagle & Wildlife Repository, CO.  Storage units..............           65             65             0
Necedah NWR, WI..........................  Rynearson #2 dam...........        3,440          3,440             0
Neosho NFH, MO...........................  Rehabilitate deficient pond          450            450             0
NFW Forensics Laboratory, OR.............  Forensics laboratory                 500            500             0
                                            expansion.
Nowitna NWR, AK..........................  Hangar--phase 1............          106            106             0
Parker River NWR, MA.....................  Headquarters complex.......        3,160              0        -3,160
Salt Plains NWR, OK......................  Wilson's Pond Bridge.......           74             74             0
San Bernard NWR, TX......................  Woods Road Bridge..........           75             75             0
Seney NWR, MI............................  Replace water control              1,450          1,450             0
                                            structure.
Sevilleta NWR, NM........................  Replace office/visitor               927            927             0
                                            building.
Smith Island NWR, MD.....................  Restoration................            0            450           450
St. Marks NWR, FL........................  Otter Lake public use                200            200             0
                                            facilities.
St. Vincent NWR, FL......................  Repair/Replace support               556            556             0
                                            facilities.
Tern Island, NWR, HI.....................  Rehabilitate seawall.......        1,800          1,800             0
Tishomingo NFH, OK.......................  Pennington Creek Footbridge           44             44             0
Tishomingo NWR, OK.......................  Replace/rehabilitate 2                54             54             0
                                            bridges.
White River NFH, VT......................  Replace roof/modify                  600            600             0
                                            structures.
Wichita Mountains WR, OK.................  Road rehabilitation........        1,564          1,564             0
Wichita Mountains WR, OK.................  Replace/rehabilitate 23            1,537          1,537             0
                                            bridges.
                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal...........................  ...........................       34,477         34,841           364
Servicewide bridge safety inspections....  ...........................          495            495             0
Servicewide dam safety inspections.......  ...........................          545            545             0
Construction management..................  ...........................        8,052          8,052             0
                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      Totals.............................  ...........................       43,569         43,933           364
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The $300,000 provided for exhibits at the Mississippi 
River Discovery Center, IA represents the full Federal 
commitment to this effort.
    2. The funding provided for the Bear River NWR, UT is 
contingent on a 50 percent non-Federal cost share for the 
visitor center portion of the project.
    3. The Committee supports the Parker River NWR, MA project 
and recently approved a reprogramming for this effort. 
Sufficient unobligated funding remains so that further funding 
is not needed for fiscal year 2000. Funding in 2001 and beyond 
should be justified by the Service consistent with the 
direction contained in the recent reprogramming approval.
    4. The funding provided for exhibits at the Ding Darling 
NWR, FL represents the total Federal funding for this project. 
Most of the funding for this visitors center has been raised 
privately and the Committee commends the Ding Darling friends 
group for its impressive efforts in that regard.
    5. Funds are provided for the Shiawassee NWR, MI under the 
land acquisition account, with the understanding that a 
visitors center will be constructed and equipped at the refuge 
using funding entirely from non-Federal sources.

                            land acquisition




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $48,024,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        73,632,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        42,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        -6,024,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -31,632,000


    The Committee recommends $42,000,000 for land acquisition, 
a decrease of $6,024,000 below the enacted level and 
$31,632,000 below the fiscal year 2000 budget request. This 
amount includes $31,835,000 for line item projects, $750,000 
for inholdings, $1,000,000 for emergencies and hardships, 
$750,000 for exchanges and $7,665,000 for acquisition 
management.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:
                                                               Committee
        Area and State                                    recommendation
Atchafalaya NWR (LA)....................................      $1,000,000
Balcones Canyonlands (TX)...............................       2,000,000
Buenos Aires NWR (Leslie Canyon) (AZ)...................       1,500,000
Canaan Valley NWR (WV)..................................         500,000
E.B. Forsythe NWR (NJ)..................................         800,000
Grand Bay NWR (AL)......................................       1,500,000
Great Swamp NWR (NJ)....................................         700,000
J.N. Ding Darling NWR (FL)..............................       4,000,000
Lower Rio Grande Valley NWR (TX)........................       2,000,000
Nisqually NWR (WA)......................................         850,000
Northern Forest:........................................
    Lake Umbagog NWR (NH/ME)............................       3,000,000
    Moosehorn NWR (ME)..................................       2,000,000
Pelican Island (FL).....................................       2,000,000
Petit Manan NWR (ME)....................................         250,000
Rappahannock River NWR (VA).............................       1,100,000
San Diego NWR (CA)......................................       3,100,000
Shiawassee NWR (MI).....................................         835,000
Silvio Conte NWR (Nulhegan) (NH)........................         500,000
Stewart McKinney NWR (CT)...............................       2,700,000
Waccamaw NWR (SC).......................................       1,500,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal..........................................      31,835,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Emergencies/Hardship....................................       1,000,000
Inholdings..............................................         750,000
Exchanges...............................................         750,000
Acquisition Management..................................       7,665,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................      42,000,000

    The Committee is concerned that two projects were included 
in the fiscal year 2000 request for land acquisition at the 
Oahu Forest in Hawaii and the Northern Tallgrass in Minnesota 
neither of which is an officially designated refuge. The 
Committee directs the Service not to propose funding for 
proposed refuges in the future. The Committee does not intend 
that this direction be an encouragement to the Service to 
establish new refuges using non-appropriated funds.
    The Committee recognizes the sensitivities of the local 
community pertaining to the creation of the Teche Black Bear 
Refuge. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shall continue to 
acquire timberlands within the Bailey property contingent on a 
mutually-acceptable land swap agreement between current 
property users, within the refuge, and the Service.
    Funding for the Shiawassee NWR is provided contingent upon 
a signed agreement stipulating that the visitors center will be 
built and equipped entirely with non-Federal funds.

            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, 1999...........................       $14,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        80,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        15,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +1,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -65,000,000


    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the cooperative 
endangered species conservation fund, a decrease of $65,000,000 
below the budget request and an increase of $1,000,000 above 
the fiscal year 1999 level. The recommended amount provides a 
total of $7,000,000 for HCP land acquisition, which is 
$1,000,000 more than the current funding level.
    The Committee has not agreed to sizable increases in land 
acquisition, either through the Cooperative Endangered Species 
Conservation Fund or through the Land Acquisition account for 
the Service. The Committee has asked the General Accounting 
Office to undertake a review of land acquisition management by 
the Service. Decisions on increasing land acquisition funding 
in the future will be made after that review has been 
completed.

                     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 $16,829,000 in 
fiscal year 2000 with $10,779,000 derived from this 
appropriation and $6,050,000 from net refuge receipts estimated 
to be collected in fiscal year 1999.




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $10,779,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        10,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        10,779,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................          +779,000


    The Committee recommends $10,779,000 for the National 
wildlife refuge fund, an increase of $779,000 above the budget 
request and equal to the fiscal year 1999 funding level.
    The Committee is concerned about the priorities of the 
Service with respect to how they relate to meeting its 
obligations under the National Wildlife Refuge Fund. In 
particular, the Committee questions why the Service has 
continued to acquire appreciably more land over the past few 
years and yet has not requested additional funding for the 
National wildlife refuge fund. This issue should be addressed 
in the 2001 budget request.

               north american wetlands conservation fund

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, through the North 
American Wetlands Fund, leverages partner contributions for 
wetlands conservation. Projects to date have been in 46 States, 
10 Canadian provinces and 17 Mexican states. 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 
Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands and American Samoa.




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $15,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        15,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        15,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the North American 
wetlands conservation fund, which is equal to both the budget 
request and the fiscal year 1999 level.

              wildlife conservation and appreciation fund

    The Wildlife Conservation and Appreciation Fund provides 
grants to States for inventory and population determinations of 
fish and wildlife species, for identification of fish and 
wildlife habitat and associated problems, and for actions to 
conserve and restore habitat and to provide public use 
opportunities.




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................          $800,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................           800,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................           800,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $800,000 for the wildlife 
conservation and appreciation fund, which is equal to both the 
budget request and the fiscal year 1999 level.

                multinational species conservation fund

    This account combines funding for the former rewards and 
operations (African elephant) account, the former rhinoceros 
and tiger conservation account, and the Asian elephant 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 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.




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $2,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         3,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         2,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -1,000,000


    The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for the multinational 
species conservation fund, equal to the 1999 level and a 
decrease of $1,000,000 below the budget request. The 
recommended funding includes $1,000,000 for African elephant 
conservation, $500,000 for rhinoceros and tiger conservation 
and $500,000 for Asian elephant conservation. The Committee 
expects these funds to be matched by non-Federal funding to 
leverage private contributions to the maximum extent possible.

                         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 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 378 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 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 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, 1999...........................    $1,287,924,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................     1,389,627,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................     1,387,307,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       +99,383,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -2,320,000


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


    The National Park Service is one of the largest agencies 
funded in the Interior appropriations bill, and over the years, 
has received significant increases in funding to address the 
critical resource and visitor use requirements of the Service. 
These increases have been provided during a time of extreme 
budget constraints and represent operational increases for the 
parks that have been much greater than the overall annual 
funding increases for the bill. The Committee continues to be 
concerned that the National Park Service views funding for its 
programs as an entitlement and has failed to address seriously 
the Committee's concerns regarding management and oversight of 
funding and programs. The Committee continues to be frustrated 
by the Service's inability to develop a simple, yet 
comprehensive method for tracking accomplishments against 
identified needs and available funding--whether this funding be 
from appropriations, fees, or other sources.
    While the Committee acknowledges the need for some degree 
of flexibility in the way parks implement and manage programs, 
the Committee observes that the Service continues to struggle 
with developing any sort of cohesive, consistent approach to 
how individual programs are managed. While the Service 
downsizing several years ago shifted greater responsibility and 
authority to the parks, this decentralization did not obviate 
the need for the Service to operate as one agency, rather than 
378 independent parks, 7 autonomous regions, and a Washington 
office. While the Committee is not advocating a centralization 
of all Service decision-making, a concerted effort must be made 
at all levels of Park Service management, including park 
superintendents and regional directors, to exercise greater 
responsibility in implementing programs with an eye towards 
servicewide goals, and not individual whims.
    The Committee recommends $1,387,307,000 for operation of 
the National Park System for fiscal year 2000, an increase of 
$99,383,000 above the enacted level and a decrease of 
$2,320,000 below the Administration request. This amount was 
appropriated last year through the Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriations Bill and was not intended to be added to the 
base. The Committee continues to consider operational 
shortfalls and backlog maintenance to be its highest priorities 
and has again focused increases in these two areas.
    The bill provides a total increase of $43,277,000 for park 
base operations, an increase of $18,277,000 above the amount 
proposed in the President's 2000 budget. This increase reflects 
the Committee's ongoing commitment to the day-to-day concerns 
that make parks accessible to visitors and provide for resource 
protection and management in fulfillment of the National Park 
Service mission. The Service has recently implemented a 
comprehensive system for identification of Service operational 
requirements, and expects these park base increases to be used 
to address the highest priorities servicewide, and not to 
target theme-oriented initiatives proposed in the budget beyond 
the amounts approved by the Committee. Within the funds 
provided, the Service is to continue funding for the recurring 
elements of the anti-terrorism supplemental that was approved 
last year and which were proposed for inclusion in the fiscal 
year 2000 budget.
    Also included in the increase is $29,686,000 for fixed 
costs, including pay increases for fiscal year 2000, and a 
$9,000,000 increase for Cyclic Maintenance and Repair and 
Rehabilitation projects. The Committee has provided large 
increases the last several years for this purpose and is 
concerned that the parks are having a difficult time expending 
the funds. To assist the Park Service, the Committee approved a 
reprogramming of $3,500,000 from the Repair and Rehabilitation 
account to help deal with the increased workload due to both 
the increase in Federal appropriation and funds from the 
Recreation Fee Demonstration Program dedicated to reducing 
backlog maintenance problems in parks. The Committee expects 
that these funds will be spent in a timely manner.
    The Committee has provided significant increases for the 
Service's natural resource initiative, including inventory and 
monitoring, natural resource preservation, native and exotic 
species management and for geologic expertise. The Committee 
applauds the Service for recognizing that the preservation of 
the diverse natural elements and the great scenic beauty of 
America's national parks and other units should be as high a 
priority in the Service as providing visitor services.
    A major part of protecting those resources is knowing what 
they are, where they are, how they interact with their 
environment and what condition they are in. This involves a 
serious commitment from the leadership of the National Park 
Service to insist that the superintendents carry out a 
systematic, consistent, professional inventory and monitoring 
program, along with other scientific activities, that is 
regularly updated to ensure that the Service makes sound 
resource decisions based on sound scientific data.
    The Committee directs the Service to provide an annual 
report that details how these funds are expended, timetables 
for results and any internal memos or directives from the 
Director concerning this effort. The Committee intends to 
monitor this initiative very closely, including the level and 
consistency of support in the parks, as well as seeing 
measurable results prior to any future dollars being allocated 
for this effort. This is an important opportunity which the 
Committee hopes the Park Service takes seriously.
    The bill contains additional increases for the Cultural 
programs, Vanishing Treasures initiative, overflight planning 
and management and the Challenge Cost Share program. A more 
detailed description of other increases and decreases can be 
found later in this section.
    The Committee has provided $1,000,000 for Recreation Fee 
Program management instead of the $2,500,000 requested. It is 
not clear to this Committee why the central offices need more 
funds to manage this program. Many superintendents also seem to 
share this view. This Committee provided the authority to 
expand the fee program and return the revenues to the parks, 
yet most of the added revenues have come from increasing fees, 
not from the addition of new collection sites or programs. 
Moreover, the workload associated with formulating and tracking 
fee-funded projects is a burden mostly affecting park staff, 
with central office staff charged with coordination and program 
oversight. The parks are already spending $22 million on fee 
collection operations and management. Accordingly, the 
Committee has determined that $1,000,000 is sufficient at this 
time to meet central office responsibilities. No additional 
funds should be made available from any other sources to 
supplement this amount without prior approval of the House and 
Senate Appropriations Committees.
    The Committee has asked the Service for years to provide an 
accurate, consistent, updated list of priority backlog 
maintenance projects, not including roads which are funded 
separately under the Federal Lands Highway program and Housing 
which is currently undergoing a clarification in policy and 
condition assessments. The Service claimed that it has a 
backlog in excess of $8,000,000,000. The General Accounting 
Office was asked to review these lists and testified to the 
Congress that the list was not credible, there were brand new 
construction projects in with backlog projects, the Service was 
not using any common definition, and the data was inconsistent 
and outdated. This has caused a serious credibility problem 
with the Congress.
    While the Department deserves credit for beginning to solve 
this problem with the five year priority backlog construction 
list, it is still unable to provide the Committee with a total 
priority backlog list or a reasonable date when that 
information would be available. The Committee commends the 
budget office and the Development Advisory Board for their work 
in carefully reviewing construction project requests. Despite 
these efforts only $1,200,000,000 in backlog projects can be 
justified. The budget contains two increases to begin to 
address this problem, but the Committee is not convinced these 
funds will yield credible results in a reasonable period of 
time.
    One thing the Committee has learned from experience is that 
merely giving the Service additional money does not always 
solve problems. A case in point is the $2,000,000 the Committee 
appropriated several years ago for housing assessments. The 
assessments are complete, yet the Service is still arguing over 
the policy and it is probable that the information gained from 
the assessments will not be used because the Service did not 
like the results.
    Therefore, the Committee has not provided the $1,000,000 
for a new Maintenance Management System nor has it provided the 
$2,500,000 for facility condition assessments by outside 
consultants. Congress has provided over $6,000,000 to the 
Service in prior years to develop and implement a maintenance 
management system. By the Service's own admission, this system 
has failed. The Committee is not yet convinced that a new 
system will be different.
    The Committee is equally cautious about providing the 
$2,500,000 for condition assessments. The Committee has 
provided over $250,000,000 in just the last two years alone for 
increases to the parks. This amount includes new FTEs as well 
as other costs. In addition, the large parks have extensive 
maintenance staffs and qualified maintenance supervisors who 
have the ability to conduct condition assessments on their 
structures. The Committee would be surprised if the parks did 
not conduct condition assessments on their structures on a 
regular basis. The Department claims that with increases each 
year, the assessments could be completed within five years. The 
Service's estimate is in excess of ten years. Both timetables 
are unacceptable.
    It is obvious that the Department and the Service are not 
in sync on how to resolve the question of what is the true 
backlog. There appears to be no clear plan, timetable or budget 
for this exercise, nor is there a priority list of parks and 
facilities that would benefit from the first year's funding. In 
addition, there is no consideration for the park's in-house 
expertise. Most importantly, there is no ``buy-in'' from the 
Park Service.
    Before the Committee provides additional taxpayer funds for 
this purpose, the Department and the Service must take these 
issues seriously and present the Committee with a clear and 
defined strategy, including specific goals, timetables, 
measurements and costs. The Committee will expect this 
information no later than January 30, 2000.
    The Committee is aware of recent problems involving both 
the retention of experienced officers within the United States 
Park Police as well as unacceptable past employment practices 
and treatment of many female officers within the Force. The 
Committee is also aware of, and strongly supports, the recent 
commitment of the Department, the National Park Service and the 
Park Police, to eliminate all vestiges of past discriminatory 
employment practices or harassment that female officers may 
have experienced during their employment with the Park Police. 
The Committee will expect the National Park Service to focus on 
U.S. Park Police pay and nondiscriminatory employment 
management practices by the Park Police during fiscal year 
2000, so that all forms of disparate treatment or inappropriate 
behavior are eliminated. The Park Police should also make an 
accelerated effort to recruit additional women as officers in 
the U.S. Park Police.
    South Florida Restoration Initiative.--The Committee 
continues its long-standing commitment to the environmental 
restoration of the Everglades and other natural areas in South 
Florida. Included in this bill is $114,000,000 contained in the 
budgets of four Department of the Interior bureaus to continue 
funding the science, research, construction and land 
acquisition needs. The Committee is concerned that the 
Administration's budget reduced the Everglades research by 
$4,000,000. The Committee has long believed that a strong 
science program is critical to the success of this project, 
which seeks to build a man-made plumbing system that will 
replicate the natural systems disturbed or destroyed by 
draining, installing dikes and channeling the rivers. The 
Administration has assured the Committee that this reduction 
will not jeopardize the success of the project.
    The Committee held its first oversight hearing on the South 
Florida Restoration Project earlier this year. Because the 
Congress has spent over $1,300,000,000 on this initiative over 
the past five years, the Committee asked the General Accounting 
Office (GAO) to review three issues: (1) How effectively have 
the funds been spent? (2) How well has the restoration effort 
been coordinated and managed? and, (3) Are there any issues, 
which left unresolved, could significantly impede the progress 
of this effort in the future?
    The GAO report raised several concerns. While the South 
Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force has compiled many 
reports on the status of this effort, GAO found that there is 
no overall strategic plan. The Committee directs the Task Force 
to develop a strategic plan that includes the Federal and non-
Federal activities necessary to accomplish all three goals of 
the restoration effort. This plan should among other things: 
(1) clearly outline how the restoration of the ecosystem will 
occur, including measurable goals and performance measures, (2) 
identify the resources needed to achieve full restoration, (3) 
assign accountability for accomplishing actions, and (4) link 
the goals of the initiative to outcome-oriented annual goals.
    This strategic plan should be submitted to the Committee 
prior to the implementation of the Central and Southern Florida 
Project Comprehensive Review Study, but no later than February 
1, 2000. The plan should be updated annually or as a result of 
any major changes in the restoration effort. In addition, a 
report on the status of Federal funds should be submitted to 
the Committee by March 1st of every year.
    Another issue of concern is that there is no official 
estimate of the total cost of the restoration effort. The 
Committee directs the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task 
Force to prepare and submit to the Committee no later than 
January 30, 2000, an estimate of the total cost of restoring 
the South Florida ecosystem, including both the Federal and 
non-Federal shares. This estimate should, among other things, 
include: (1) the cost of the activities planned by all Federal 
and non-Federal participants to accomplish the three goals of 
the initiative; namely (a) getting the water right, (b) 
restoring and enhancing the natural habitat, and (c) 
transforming the built environment, and (2) a projected 
completion date for the restoration initiative. This estimate 
should be updated and submitted to the Committee on an annual 
basis.
    With the large number of participants involved in this 
effort, including 15 Federal agencies, the State of Florida, 
local governments, Indian tribes and other private 
organizations, many of whom have different mandates and 
interests, problems and conflicts that could delay the 
completion of projects and activities are bound to arise. 
Already, two ongoing infrastructure projects that are integral 
to the restoration effort are taking longer and costing more 
than planned. Both the Modified Water Deliveries and the C-111 
projects are more than 2 years behind schedule and together 
could cost about $80,000,000 more to complete than originally 
estimated.
    While the Task Force is responsible for facilitating the 
resolution of interagency and intergovernmental conflicts among 
partners, and has done an admirable job to date, the Task Force 
is a coordinating body, not a decision-making entity which has 
binding authority to resolve serious conflicts and thus is 
limited in its ability to manage and be accountable for the 
overall restoration effort. Because of the complexity of the 
project, it is reasonable to assume that conflicts will become 
more common. Unless a clear mechanism with clear lines of 
authority is developed to resolve these conflicts quickly, 
there will be more delays and cost overruns. This is not 
acceptable to the Committee or to the agencies and programs 
contained in this bill that are affected by the enormous 
resources channeled to this initiative. Therefore, the 
Committee directs the Administration and the Task Force to 
recommend a process with direct binding authority for resolving 
conflicts quickly. This may require new legislative authority, 
which the Committee will seriously consider. The current system 
is not acceptable. The Committee expects the Administration and 
the Task Force to submit their recommendations to the Committee 
by January 15, 2000.
    The Committee directed the Secretary of the Interior to 
submit by March 31, 1999 a comprehensive land acquisition plan 
in priority order for non-Federal lands as part of the South 
Florida ecosystem restoration effort. The Committee notes that 
an incomplete list was just recently unofficially provided. 
This Committee has been very patient over the last five years 
and is concerned that the Secretary has not provided a complete 
official response to this simple request. One of the 
Committee's concerns in making this request has been confirmed 
by the Secretary's inaction. It is obvious that the partners 
cannot agree on priorities and do not want to be accountable to 
the Congress that provides fifty percent of these funds. This 
blatant disregard of such a reasonable request cannot be 
tolerated and the requested information should be provided 
forthwith by the Secretary.
    As in the past, the Committee has retained the bill 
language requiring a 50 percent State match in newly 
appropriated dollars.
    Bill language is included under the land acquisition 
account which makes the federal and state acquisition for South 
Florida contingent upon: (1) an agreement between principle 
partners which provides specifics to achieve guaranteed water 
supply to the Everglades and other related lands, (2) 
submission of a legislative package to achieve that goal and 
(3) submission of a complete, non-federal land acquisition 
priority list.
    Ellis Island.--The Committee has included $1,000,000 in the 
construction account, as requested by the Administration, to 
continue the critical emergency stabilization work on the South 
side of Ellis Island. In addition, the Committee has included 
bill language in the Construction account which allows the Park 
Service to retain 100 percent of the Service's share of ferry 
revenues, which amount to approximately $6,000,000 every year. 
These funds had previously gone to the General Fund in the 
Treasury. The Committee has placed two conditions on the use of 
these funds including (1) revenues must be used for 
stabilization and rehabilitation work and, (2) beginning in 
fiscal year 2001 these funds must be matched on a dollar for 
dollar basis. The Committee is hopeful that it will not be 
difficult to raise these matching funds for one of the most 
important historical sites in the National Park System.
    Housing.--For several years, the Committee has been 
concerned about the cost and extent of the Service's employee 
housing program. The Committee has been very supportive of the 
need to assure that quality housing is provided when it is 
necessary to protect resources and serve visitors. However, the 
cost of providing housing has been staggering. Over the past 10 
years, the Committee has appropriated nearly $200 million to 
repair and construct Park Service employee housing, and the 
agency has estimated that it needs another $300 million to 
repair and replace some of its existing housing inventory. 
While we have supported the agency in the past, we are 
convinced that the Service has not done all it can to assure 
that it provides housing only when absolutely necessary; that 
apartments or duplex housing are considered in place of single 
family homes; and that common design and planning documents are 
used to ensure cost effective housing.
    In the early 1990's, it was clear from General Accounting 
Office reports that the Park Service could not justify the need 
for all of its current housing. In 1996, the Department of the 
Interior's Inspector General reported on agency practices which 
led to the construction of $500,000 homes in Yosemite and Grand 
Canyon--excessively expensive by any measure. As a direct 
result of language in both the 1996 Omnibus Parks Act and the 
Interior Appropriations Act, the Service hired an independent 
consultant to conduct a needs assessment based on directions 
from the Washington office. In addition, the Director committed 
to a revised housing policy which would (1) minimize the 
agency's need for housing by relying more on the private sector 
and (2) exhaust all alternatives to in-park housing before 
replacing or constructing additional park housing. Both were 
accomplished last year and the Committee's initial reaction was 
favorable.
    However, the Committee has been greatly disappointed to 
watch the events of the last six months regarding both 
implementation of the policy and the results of the needs 
assessments which cost the American taxpayers $2,000,000! The 
park managers don't like the policy or the assessments which 
indicated that about 75 percent of the parks had too much 
housing. In fact, the park managers feel that they need what 
exists and more. As of this date, the Service has taken no 
definitive action to resolve the conflict. The Committee is 
concerned that the Park Service may be trying to develop a new 
policy that will justify its existing, or an expanded housing 
stock, rather than devising ways to ensure consistent 
application and compliance with the existing policy.
    In addition, it appears that little has been accomplished 
in implementing alternatives to in-park housing where 
appropriate, despite the fact that the authorizing committee 
gave the Service new authority last year (which the Service had 
requested) that expands the alternatives available for 
construction and repair of housing and provides incentives to 
the private sector to finance or provide housing. In fact, 
there are so few examples of alternatives being implemented 
that it raises questions about whether alternatives are being 
pursued at all.
    While this Committee does not want to write the National 
Park Service's Housing Policy, it will not tolerate the status 
quo or a greatly watered down policy which allows all existing 
housing plus additional new housing in every unit of the 
Service, particularly when affordable housing is available 
within a reasonable distance. While the Committee might 
understand some minor adjustments to the consultant's 
recommendations or even the policy itself, a complete overhaul 
is not acceptable. The Committee is concerned that park 
superintendents are more interested in defending past housing 
practices, rather than taking a critical look at what makes 
economic sense for the future. Convenience and experience are 
not sufficient factors to justify housing. Other Federal 
agencies have resource protection missions commensurate with 
the Park Service in equally remote locations and manage with 
significantly less numbers of housing units. If the Service 
contends that housing is justified, it should substantiate 
these claims with appropriate programmatic and financial 
analysis.
    The Committee directs the Service to make the hard 
decisions that need to be made. This includes developing a 
policy that will be implemented fairly, that recognizes the 
fact that there is a limited amount of Federal money and makes 
good use of the legislative authorities that the Congress has 
provided the Service. A policy, complete with a detailed 
strategy including specific timetables, priority parks housing 
needs and total costs, should be provided to the Committee no 
later than September 1, 1999. The Committee will need this 
information in order to complete conference on the fiscal year 
2000 bill. There is currently $17,000,000 that was appropriated 
last year for trailer replacement which has not been obligated 
due to the lack of policy and the Committee has included 
another $13,500,000 in this bill for the same purpose. Should 
the Service not have a reasonable policy and plan for 
implementation by September 1, the Committee will redirect 
these funds to other needs in the bill.
    Business plans.--The Committee continues to be very 
supportive of the Service's business plan initiative but is 
growing frustrated that Service leadership has focused so 
little attention on analyzing the results of the first eight 
demonstration projects. At this stage, the Service should be 
able to refine the best aspects of these projects and be 
working toward a final template which can be used in all parks. 
The Committee sees particular value in the documentation and 
analysis parks engage in to ascertain how they are spending 
funds available to them. It is not the intention of this 
Committee to use the business plan products to justify millions 
of dollars of unmet needs. Rather, it is to ensure that parks 
can articulate why they have made the decisions they have with 
regard to the allocation of resources. More money and more 
people cannot be the answer to every management challenge.
    The Committee is also concerned that this project has been 
delayed due to concerns about how it interfaces with the GPRA 
initiative. The Committee does not agree with these concerns 
and directs the Service to move quickly to the next logical 
step in promoting the business plan concept. The Committee does 
not agree that it conflicts in any way with GPRA or that there 
should be any modifications undertaken which result in any 
delay of final implementation. The Committee expects a report 
of the status of this effort by January 30, 2000.
    Partnerships.--The Committee has supported and encouraged 
partnerships between the Service and other Federal and non-
Federal partners. To assist, the Congress has even provided new 
and expanded legislative authorities over the last several 
years. However, the Committee is concerned about several 
projects that seem to be driven more by local and regional 
interests rather than the interest of the National Park 
Service. As long as there are common goals, and the project 
fills a high priority Federal need, the Committee will support 
the project. The Park Service superintendents and planners 
should be very careful about following this guidance. The 
Committee will not hesitate to revoke the broad discretionary 
authorities that it has entrusted to the Service if this trend 
continues.
    Other.--The Committee requests that $125,000 be allocated 
from operational increases provided above the Administration's 
request, for a study to extend the Mt. Vernon multi-use trail 
north to I-495. This study should include alternatives that 
incorporate county lands and national park lands as routes to 
achieve this objective.
    The Committee encourages the National Park Service to 
continue to work with the National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration and the Justice Department to develop and 
implement a program to photograph automatically speeding 
vehicles and issue violation notices to speeders on the George 
Washington Memorial Parkway. This program is intended to 
improve the safety of motorists using the Parkway.
    The Mount Vernon Trail, which is part of the George 
Washington Memorial Parkway, is an 18.5 mile multi-use trail 
that handles over 500,000 users each year. There is great 
disregard for the rules and regulations that govern the safe 
use of the trail and protection of all users. The Committee 
directs the Service to provide greater enforcement on the 
trail. Funds should be provided from the increase to the 
operations budget over the Administration's request.
    Within the interpretation and education program, a one-time 
amount of $65,000 is provided for the Claude Moore Colonial 
Farm at Turkey Run Park to support educational programs which 
foster public understanding and appreciation of the importance 
of agriculture in the development of American society. The 
Committee has been very generous in providing these funds for 
the past several years, however, these funds will not be 
provided in future years. The Committee strongly encourages the 
local friends group to begin to raise the private funds that 
will be needed to support this activity in the future.
    The Committee is pleased with the National Park Service's 
strategic plan for managing invasive non-native plants on 
National Park System lands and its aggressive efforts to 
eradicate non-native species. The Committee urges the Service 
to be pro-active in implementing its goal to provide park 
managers and the public with acceptable native alternatives to 
non-native plant materials and to increase public awareness of 
these issues. In implementing these goals, the Service should 
examine ways in which it can enhance habitat which benefits 
birds and pollinators. In particular, where it is appropriate, 
the Service should implement alternative regimens for mowing 
grass.
    The Committee recognizes the great value of Cumberland 
Island's rich and diverse cultural, natural, and historic 
resources and expects that this diversity be preserved in 
perpetuity. The Committee encourages the National Park Service 
to implement a balanced cultural, historic and wilderness 
management plan for Cumberland Island consistent with the 
Department of the Interior's mission statement, which is not 
intended to promote competition for resources among its various 
resource protection needs. This direction is consistent with 
the recent Memorandum of Agreement reached during the 
collaborative Cumberland Island stakeholders group meetings 
which included officials from the Department of the Interior, 
environmental groups, historic preservation groups and island 
residents. The Committee endorses this signed agreement and 
expects the Department to fulfill both the letter and the 
spirit of the agreement.
    The Committee is concerned that non-native species are 
causing serious damage to native plants and soils within the 
boundaries of the White Sands National Monument. The National 
Park Service needs to move expeditiously to come up with an 
environmentally sound plan to prevent further damage to the 
monument. Every available method should be considered to remove 
the non-native species from the monument site.
    The Committee requests a report from the National Park 
Service by April 1, 2000, on threats to the Carlsbad Caverns 
National Park that caused the recent Secretarial land 
withdrawal. The report should include steps that have been 
taken to implement the Cave Protection Act in the area 
surrounding the park boundaries. The Committee is especially 
interested in what steps the Department of the Interior took to 
seek input from local groups, elected officials, citizens and 
other interested parties before the decision was made.
    The Committee directs the Park Service to provide $200,000 
within existing funds to begin work on a Global Information 
System map network for the eight National Scenic Trails. At 
this time, most maps of these trails are on paper and vary 
widely in terms of accuracy. This presents difficulties in 
providing necessary information to trail managers, users and 
other stakeholders in trail development and enjoyment. The 
Committee recognizes the value of accurate, detailed mapping of 
trail routes, and supports development of this system to 
improve interpretation, maintenance, and development of the 
National Scenic Trails System.
    Within the increases provided above the Administration's 
request, the Service is directed to conduct a study on the 
historic and cultural significance of Lincoln Highway, the 
nation's first coast-to-coast paved roadway. The Congress 
doubled the amount available for the Service's Federal Lands 
Highway Program. Within those increases, the Service should 
continue its support for the New Found Gap Tunnel which is part 
of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
    Bill language has been included under General Provisions, 
Department of the Interior regarding grazing at the Lake 
Roosevelt National Recreation Area. The Committee wishes to 
reaffirm that beneficial uses at the Lake Roosevelt National 
Recreation Area include historical and traditional agriculture, 
grazing, recreation and cultural uses pursuant to a permit 
issued by the Service. Pursuant to the Lake Roosevelt National 
Recreation Area's new general management plan, existing and 
past historical use, and community moorage/public access 
facilities permitted by the Service at the Area may remain 
permitted under Service authority until it is determined by the 
Service that the permitted facility or activity is in conflict 
with a new or expanded concession facility at which time the 
Service may choose to terminate that specific permit.
    The Committee encourages Lake Roosevelt NRA to provide 
support to the Lake Roosevelt Forum for a broad based public 
education and outreach program which promotes balanced river 
and watershed management.
    The Northeast region is encouraged to provide technical 
assistance to interest groups and communities involved in the 
creation of a heritage area near Drake Well in Northeastern 
Pennsylvania.
    As proposed in the budget, the Committee has included an 
additional $1,312,000 in this bill which is dedicated to the 
upcoming bicentennial celebrations of the Lewis and Clark 
Expedition.
    Bill language is included under General Provisions, 
Department of the Interior, which renames the Steel Industry 
Heritage Area the ``Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area''.
    The following resource studies should be undertaken during 
fiscal year 2000: (1) Lowcountry Gullah Culture in South 
Carolina; (2) Revolutionary War sites in New Jersey; and (3) 
Loess Hills in Iowa.
    The Committee strongly encourages the Service to prepare a 
General Management Plan for the Lower East Side Tenement NHS.
    The Committee directs the Service to establish a citizens 
task force for the Jean Lafitte NHP&P; whose specific purpose is 
to review the condition of, and make recommendations on 
suggested improvement to, the Chalmette Battlefield. The task 
force should be comprised of the park superintendent, St 
Bernard parish government, local officials, chamber of commerce 
officials, and the local tourism industry. The study should 
only consider federally owned buildings and artifacts within 
the boundary of the Jean Lafitte NHP&P.; The task force should 
be mindful of the fact that Federal funds are limited and 
suggestions should address non-Federal cost sharing.
    The Committee is aware that the General Management Plan 
(GMP) for Morristown National Historical Park (NHP) has not 
been updated since 1976 causing delays in management decisions. 
Therefore, the Committee directs the National Park Service to 
update the GMP for Morristown NHP.
    Resource stewardship.--The Committee recommends 
$265,114,000 for resource stewardship, an increase of 
$36,295,000 above the enacted level and $1,661,000 below the 
request. Included in this amount are increases of $16,403,000 
for special need park operations, $8,000,000 for inventory and 
monitoring, $3,500,000 for natural resources preservation 
program, $4,000,000 for native and exotic species management, 
$735,000 for geologic programs, $500,000 to initiate the newly 
authorized Resource Protection Act, $1,000,000 for the cultural 
resources preservation program, $1,000,000 for the collection 
management program, $994,000 for Vanishing Treasures and 
$4,603,000 for uncontrollable expenses. The Committee 
cautiously accepts the $4,000,000 reduction for Everglades 
science and $440,000 for Presidio transition costs. The 
following requests were not provided and should not be made 
available from any other source: $2,021,000 for California 
Desert, $5,000,000 for America's Treasures On Line, and 
$499,000 for the South Florida Task Force.
    Visitor services.--The Committee recommends $320,558,000 
for visitor services, an increase of $19,320,000 above the 
enacted level and $752,000 above the request. Included in this 
amount above last year's levels are increases of $13,813,000 
for special need park operations, $800,000 for air tour 
overflight planning and management, $1,000,000 for the 
management of the recreation fee program and $6,997,000 for 
uncontrollable expenses. The Committee accepts the reduction of 
$3,290,000 for Presidio transition costs. The following 
requests were not provided and should not be made available 
from any other source: $150,000 for trails and rails 
partnership, $500,000 for a new conservation education program, 
and $150,000 for continuity of operations planning. The 
Committee does not agree to continue the entire one-time 
emergency supplemental funds provided last year.
    Maintenance.--The Committee recommends $442,881,000 for 
maintenance, an increase of $30,951,000 from the enacted level 
and $1,800,000 above the request. Included in this amount above 
last year's levels are increases of $11,379,000 for special 
need park operations, $4,000,000 for cyclic maintenance, 
$5,000,000 for repair/rehabilitation and $10,572,000 for 
uncontrollable expenses. The following requests were not 
provided and should not be made available from any other 
source: $2,500,000 for condition assessments and $1,000,000 for 
a new maintenance management system. Funds should be provided 
for necessary maintenance of the First Infantry Division 
Monument located near the White House. This monument is the 
property of the National Park Service. The Committee directs 
the Service to provide $40,000 to correct deficiencies at the 
Bell Haven Comfort Station along the George Washington Memorial 
Parkway.
    Park support.--The Committee recommends $248,895,000 for 
park support, an increase of $9,966,000 above the enacted level 
and a reduction of $2,985,000 below the request. Included in 
this amount are increases of $1,682,000 for special need park 
operations, $1,000,000 for partners for parks coordination and 
training, $1,000,000 for the challenge cost share program, 
$750,000 for financial system integration, $500,000 to upgrade 
budget formulation, $325,000 for information management system 
support, $150,000 for property management workforce training 
and $5,143,000 for uncontrollable expenses.
    The following requests were not provided and should not be 
made available from any other source: $1,981,000 for a new 
humanity for habitat program and expansion of the volunteers-
in-parks program and $250,000 for workforce diversity plan 
implementation. The Committee accepts the reductions of 
$509,000 for Presidio transition costs and $75,000 for AFSII.
    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 following two projects should be funded from within the 
increases the Committee has provided over the Administration's 
request: $150,000 for the Potomac Heritage National Scenic 
Trail and $150,000 for the section of the Trail of Tears which 
runs through Chattanooga, Tennessee. These amounts are intended 
to be provided as base funding and should be specifically noted 
in the fiscal year 2001 budget request.
    External administrative costs.--The Committee recommends 
$109,859,000 for external administrative costs, an increase of 
$5,171,000 above the enacted level and a reduction of $226,000 
below the request. Increases include $2,800,000 for GSA space 
rental and $2,371,000 for uncontrollable expenses.

                  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, 1999...........................       $46,225,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        48,336,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        45,449,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          -776,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -2,887,000


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


    The Committee affirms the importance and uniqueness of the 
National Park Service museum collections. Managed and 
interpreted in their original contexts, these objects, 
archives, and specimens are critical to our nation's ability to 
preserve and exhibit its cultural and natural heritage. 
Superintendents need to be mindful of their considerable 
responsibility in protecting and interpreting this resource.
    The Committee has a long-standing interest in the welfare 
of these collections, having designated funding specifically 
for their preservation, protection and cataloging since 1987. 
Included in the operations budget is an additional $1,000,000 
for this purpose. The Committee stresses the importance of 
ensuring that funds so designated continue to be used for their 
intended purpose. In addition, the National Park Service should 
continue to apply Recreation Fee Demonstration funds and other 
eligible funds, as appropriate, to addressing these needs.
    Recreation programs.--The Committee recommends $533,000, an 
increase of $18,000 above the enacted level and the same as the 
request. The increase is intended for fixed costs.
    Natural programs.--The Committee recommends $10,090,000, an 
increase of $1,002,000 above the enacted level and $2,750,000 
below the request. The increase includes $217,000 for fixed 
costs, $285,000 for hydropower relicensing assistance and 
$500,000 for the Rivers and Trails technical assistance 
program. The following request was not provided and should not 
be made available from any other sources: -$1,250,000 for a 
Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails initiative.
    Cultural programs.--The Committee recommends $19,364,000, 
an increase of $308,000 above the enacted level and a decrease 
of $800,000 below the request. The increase is provided for 
fixed costs. The Committee does not approve a new NHL theme 
studies program.
    International park affairs.--The Committee recommends 
$1,699,000, an increase of $28,000 above the enacted level and 
$150,000 below the request. The increase is provided for fixed 
costs. The Committee does not approve $150,000 for 
international leadership training. These funds should not be 
provided from any other source.
    Environmental and compliance review.--The Committee 
recommends $373,000, an increase of $15,000 above the enacted 
level and the same as the budget requests. The increase is 
provided for fixed costs.
    Grant administration.--The Committee recommends $1,819,000, 
an increase of $68,000 above the enacted level and the same as 
the budget request. The increase is provided for fixed costs.
    Statutory or contractual aid.--The Committee recommends 
$4,685,000, a decrease of $3,242,000 below the enacted level 
and $63,000 below the request.
    Heritage partnership programs.--The Committee recommends 
$6,886,000, an increase of $1,027,000 above the enacted level 
and $750,000 above the request. This amount includes an 
increase of $27,000 for fixed costs, and an increase of 
$1,000,000 for commissions and grants, which is $750,000 above 
the increase proposed in the budget. It is the intent of the 
Committee that the Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area 
be funded at a level of $1,000,000 as well as the Ohio and Erie 
Canal National Heritage Corridor, the Rivers of Steel National 
Heritage Area and the Essex National Heritage Area.
    The Committee directs the Service to provide a report in 
April of 2000 which describes the status of each project and 
the disbursal of Federal funds. Bill language is included under 
this section of the bill which limits overhead administrative 
expenses to $100,000. The Committee does not approve of the 
trend to increase overhead each year.
    Urban Parks and recreation fund.--The Committee did not 
provide the request of $4,000,000 for the Urban Parks Program. 
All increases are being focused on reducing the operational 
shortfalls and serious backlog maintenance for the National 
Park units.

                       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, 1999...........................       $72,412,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        80,512,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        46,712,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       -25,700,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -33,800,000


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


    The Committee recommends $46,712,000, which is $25,700,000 
below the enacted level and a reduction of $33,800,000 below 
the fiscal year 2000 budget request.
    This total amount includes an increase of $1,000,000 for 
the State Historic Preservation Offices, an increase of 
$3,300,000 for the Historically Black Colleges and Universities 
and level funding for the Tribal grants. No funding has been 
provided for a new National Historic Landmark Grants program.
    The increase provided for the Historically Black Colleges 
and Universities makes available $11,722,000 for fiscal year 
2000. This amount will enable the Park Service to complete the 
schools specifically earmarked in the 1996 Omnibus Parks Act. 
As in the past, the funds will require a 50 percent match of 
non-Federal funds. Within this total amount, $200,000 is for 
facility condition assessments.
    Although funding has not been provided at this time for the 
Millennium Initiative, the Committee feels that there is merit 
to providing a second and final year of funding for cultural 
backlog projects of the National Park Service and other 
agencies funded in this bill to celebrate the Millennium next 
year. The Committee will continue to keep this priority in mind 
as the bill progresses through the fiscal year 2000 process.
    Bill language is included under this account which makes 
available funds derived from providing review services 
associated with the historic preservation tax certification 
program. In addition, the Committee has amended Section 403(a) 
of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 which will 
permit the Service to move staff around the country to meet 
program needs.

                              construction




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $239,738,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       194,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       169,856,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       -69,882,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -24,144,000


    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:

        Project                                                   Amount
Apostle Islands NL, WI (Meyers Beach)...................        $500,000
Assateague Island NS, MD/VA (rehabilitation)............         973,000
Badlands NP, SD (waste-water treatment facility)........       1,572,000
Big Cypress NPre, FL (visitor facilities)...............       4,965,000
Black Archives A&M;, FL..................................       2,800,000
Blackstone River Valley Heritage RI/MA (various)........       1,000,000
Boston NHP, MA (rehabilitation).........................       1,049,000
Brown vs. Board of Education NHS, KS (rehabilitation)...       6,335,000
Castle Clinton NM, NY (rehabilitation)..................         460,000
Colonial NHP, VA (water/sewer)..........................         714,000
Cumberland Island NS, GA (rehabilitate--Plum Orchard)...       1,400,000
Cuyahoga Valley NRA, OH (rehabilitation)................       4,000,000
Dayton Aviation NHP, OH (Huffman Prairie/media/film)....         428,000
Death Valley NP, CA (replace unsafe building)...........       6,335,000
Delaware Water Gap NRA, NJ (Depew rec site).............         500,000
Delaware Lehigh Heritage, PA (various)..................         500,000
Edison NHS, NJ (rehabilitation).........................       3,032,000
Everglades NP, FL (modified water delivery).............      20,000,000
Everglades NP, FL (new waste-water plant)...............       1,288,000
Florissant Fossil Beds NM, CO (protect resource)........       1,131,000
Fort Stanwix NM, NY (rehabilitation)....................       2,500,000
Gateway NRA, NJ (Sandy Hook utilities)..................       1,593,000
George Washington Memorial Parkway, VA (Humpback Bridge)         500,000
Gettysburg NMP, PA (utilities)..........................       1,100,000
Glacier Bay NP&P;, AK (rehabilitate sewer system)........       2,526,000
Golden Gate NRA, CA (rehabilitation)....................       1,075,000
Grand Canyon NP, AZ (rehabilitate water/sewer)..........         670,000
Hot Springs NP, AR (rehabilitation).....................       1,000,000
Indiana Dunes NL, IN (environmental education center)...         500,000
Lake Mead NRA, NV (water treatment).....................       3,839,000
National Underground R.R. Freedom Center................       1,000,000
New Bedford Whaling NHP, MA (stabilization).............         800,000
Olympic NP--Elwha, WA (water supply)....................       4,000,000
Padre Island NS, TX (waste water treatment facility)....         823,000
Perry's Victory & IPM, OH (rehabilitation)..............         200,000
Sequoia & Kings Canyon NP, CA (rehabilitation)..........       5,621,000
Sleeping Bear Dunes NL, MI (parking/restrooms)..........         800,000
Southwest Penn. Heritage, PA (rehabilitation)...........       3,000,000
Statue of Liberty NM & Ellis Island, NY/NJ 
    (stabilization).....................................       1,000,000
Timucuan Ecological & Historic Preserve, FL (boat docks)         550,000
Tonto NM, AZ (restrooms/waste-water treatment)..........         703,000
Wilson's Creek NB, MO (complete library)................         250,000
Yellowstone NP, WY (waste-water treatment)..............       4,690,000
Yosemite NP, CA (waste disposal)........................       1,850,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Project total.....................................      99,572,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Emergency/unscheduled housing...........................      13,500,000
Dam Safety..............................................       1,440,000
Equipment Replacement...................................      15,000,000
General Management Plans................................       7,724,000
Special Resource Studies................................         825,000
Construction Planning...................................      10,195,000
Pre-Planning & Supp. Services...........................       4,500,000
Construction Program Management.........................      17,100,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal..........................................      70,284,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
      Grand Total.......................................     169,856,000

    The Committee recommends $169,856,000, a decrease of 
$69,882,000 below the enacted level and $24,144,000 below the 
request. The Committee commends the Park Service for its 
construction request this year which clearly focused on health 
and safety priorities. The Committee has funded 25 of 36 
projects recommended in the budget. It has not funded several 
projects which were not recommended through the Service's 
priority setting process and two projects that will not be able 
to expend the funds during the fiscal year.
    The Committee was shocked to see additional funding for the 
FDR Memorial located in Washington, D.C. included in the 
budget. The Committee had no idea that the Park Service or the 
Department was involved in discussions about expanding the new 
memorial. The Committee provided over $40,000,000 for this 
project which was completed last year. The Committee reminds 
the Service that not only did the private fundraising effort 
fall far short of its goals but that the former President 
requested that a memorial, if built, be no larger than his 
desk.
    The issue of whether FDR should be shown in a wheelchair 
has been exhaustively debated during the many years dedicated 
to planning and designing this memorial. For a private group to 
decide now, after the memorial is complete, that this statue is 
needed is problematic from a Federal funding perspective. The 
Committee does not take a position on the inclusion of a statue 
at this site. However, should it be decided by the appropriate 
authorities that such a statue would be appropriate, then non-
Federal funds should pay for its construction, consistent with 
Public Law 105-29.
    The Committee notes that the Service has made good progress 
in implementing the construction reforms in the National 
Academy of Public Administration's report of last year 
including the significant reduction of in-house staff at the 
Denver Service Center. Full and successful implementation of 
this report should be one of the highest priorities of the 
National Park Service.
    Also included in the budget is $2,800,000 to complete the 
Federal share for the Center for Regional Black Culture at 
Florida A&M; authorized in Public Law 105-138. The Committee 
recommends $1,000,000 for projects associated with the 
Blackstone River Valley Heritage Area and $714,000 for Colonial 
NHP for a one-time connection to local water and sewer lines.
    Included in the bill is $4,000,000 for continued 
rehabilitation projects at the Cuyahoga National Recreation 
Area and $428,000 for Dayton Aviation NHP for planning of the 
Huffman Prairie building and for media and educational 
programs. The Committee has included $500,000 for visitor 
enhancements at the Depew recreational site within the Delaware 
Water Gap National Recreation Area, and $500,000 for visitor 
access at Apostle Islands National Lakeshore.
    Also available is $500,000 for projects associated with the 
Delaware Lehigh National Heritage Area and $2,500,000 to 
complete the rehabilitation project at the Fort Stanwix NM. The 
Committee has included $500,000 for a temporary pedestrian 
bridge at Humpback Bridge along the George Washington Memorial 
Parkway. The current situation presents a clear danger to both 
pedestrians and bicycle users.
    Included is $1,000,000 to continue the rehabilitation of 
bathhouses at the Hot Springs NP and $500,000 to complete the 
existing environmental education center located at Indiana 
Dunes NL in Indiana. The Committee has provided $200,000 to 
complete the Perry's Victory and IPM and $800,000 is included 
for restrooms and additional parking in Sleeping Bear Dunes NL. 
The Committee has included $550,000 which will complete new 
docks at the Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve and 
$250,000 to be matched by private funds to complete a 
rehabilitation project at the Wilson's Creek NB. Also included 
is $1,000,000 for the National Underground R.R. Freedom Center 
in Cincinnati, Ohio. These funds are subject to a non-federal 
match and an authorization.
    Bill language is included under the construction account of 
the bill in addition to $1,850,000 provided for Yosemite 
National Park. The language permits the park to contribute 37 
percent of the estimated $5,000,000 cost of upgrading the local 
municipal solid waste disposal plant based on their use of the 
facility. While this action is highly unusual for the Committee 
to take, the Park Service assures the Committee that should the 
State close this facility for health violations, the park would 
incur a great deal more annually if it had to transport the 
park's trash to the nearest alternative facility.
    The Committee has included the $1,000,000 included in the 
budget to continue the ongoing stabilization work at Ellis 
Island. The Committee has also included bill language under the 
construction section of the bill which would allow the Park 
Service to retain 100 percent of its share of ferry revenue 
which has previously been unavailable for their use. This 
amount is approximately $6,000,000 annually. These funds must 
be spent for stabilization and rehabilitation and in fiscal 
year 2001 will be subject to a non-Federal match in order to 
maximize the funds.

                    Land and Water Conservation Fund

                              (Rescission)




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      -$30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       -30,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       -30,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends the rescission of $30,000,000 in 
annual contract authority provided by 16 U.S.C. 460l-10a. This 
authority has not been used in years, and there are no plans to 
use it in fiscal year 2000.

                 land acquisition and state assistance




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $147,925,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       172,468,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       102,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       -45,925,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -70,468,000


    The Committee recommends $102,000,000 for land acquisition, 
a decrease of $45,925,000 below the enacted level and 
$70,468,000 below the fiscal year 2000 budget request. This 
amount includes $88,800,000 for line item projects, $3,000,000 
for emergencies and hardships, $1,200,000 for inholdings and 
exchanges and $8,500,000 for acquisition management, and 
$500,000 for State grant administration.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:

                                                               Committee
        Area and State                                    recommendation
Antietam NB (MD)........................................      $2,000,000
Apostle Islands NL (WI).................................         250,000
Big Cypress NPre (FL)...................................      11,800,000
Biscayne NP (FL)........................................         600,000
Blue Ridge Parkway (NC/VA)..............................         225,000
Boston Harbor Islands NRA (MA)..........................       2,000,000
Cape Cod NS (MA)........................................       2,700,000
Chesapeake & Ohio Canal NHP (MD)........................         800,000
Cuyahoga Valley NRA (OH)................................       1,000,000
Ebey's Landing NHR (WA).................................       1,000,000
Everglades NP (FL)......................................      20,000,000
Gettysburg NMP (PA).....................................       3,525,000
Grants to State (FL)....................................      10,000,000
Ice Age National Scenic Trail (WI)......................       2,000,000
Indiana Dunes NL (IN)...................................       2,400,000
Keweenaw NHP (MI).......................................       1,750,000
Manassas NB (VA)........................................         400,000
Martin Luther King Jr. NHS (GA).........................       5,000,000
Monocacy NB (MD)........................................       1,500,000
Olympic NP (WA).........................................       2,500,000
Paoli Battlefield (PA)..................................       1,250,000
Pecos NHP (NM)..........................................       1,800,000
Prince William Forest Park (VA).........................       1,000,000
Saguaro NP (AZ).........................................       2,800,000
Santa Monica Mts. NRA (CA)..............................       2,000,000
Stones River NB (TN)....................................       3,000,000
Virgin Islands NP (St. John's) (VI).....................       3,000,000
Weir Farm NHS (CT)......................................       2,500,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal..........................................      88,800,000
Emergency & Hardship....................................       3,000,000
Inholdings & Exchanges..................................       1,200,000
Acquisition Management..................................       8,500,000
State Grant Administration..............................         500,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................     102,000,000

    The Committee has included $32,400,000 which will complete 
the purchase of land within the boundaries of the Everglades 
National Park, Big Cypress National Preserve and Biscayne 
National Park which are all considered a part of the South 
Florida Restoration Project. In addition, the Committee has 
included $10,000,000 for grants to the State of Florida to 
further this initiative subject to a fifty percent match of 
newly appropriated non-Federal funds. The Committee notes that 
as of June 1, 1999, $53,000,000 in Federal land acquisition 
funds for South Florida remains unobligated as well as 
$60,000,000 provided to the State of Florida for acquisitions. 
These new funds are also directly tied to a legislatively 
binding agreement between Federal and non-Federal partners 
which clearly sets out a guaranteed water supply to the 
National Parks and other natural areas including Florida Bay. 
Bill language is included under the land acquisition section of 
the bill.
    The Committee has provided $2,000,000 to help complete the 
Backbone Trail in the Santa Monica Mountains National 
Recreation Area contingent on an equal match from non-Federal 
sources specifically for the acquisition of the Backbone Trail. 
Also included in the bill is $2,000,000 to purchase the final 
island as part of the Boston Harbor Islands NRA in 
Massachusetts. This amount is contingent upon a $3,000,000 
match by the State.
    Funds provided for the Paoli Battlefield are contingent 
upon authorization and a fifty percent non-federal match.
    The Committee has included bill language under the land 
acquisition account which modifies the reprogramming guidelines 
to allow the acceptance of offers to sell for more than the 
appraised value for tracts with an appraised value of $50,000 
or less.

                    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 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, 1999...........................      $798,896,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       838,485,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       820,444,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       +21,548,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -18,041,000


    Over the past few budget cycles, the Committee has noted 
that the Survey's budget submissions have emphasized a number 
of new activities outside of the traditional mission of the 
Survey, and to the detriment of some of the long-standing core 
mission areas. These new programs have focused on topics such 
as: coordination of hazard information delivery, and real-time 
water quality data delivery. In the Committee's opinion, this 
``initiative du jour'' approach to budgeting is having a 
negative impact on the Survey's ability to perform quality 
research in support of its basic mission, and has resulted in 
some glaring inconsistencies in policy.
    For example, in fiscal year 1999 funding for the 
Administration's Clean Water Action Plan was the Survey's 
highest priority, but in the 2000 budget submission the Survey 
proposed reductions to its clean water programs. At the same 
time, budgets for such traditional areas as: coastal and marine 
research, mineral resource surveys, cooperation with state 
water agencies, streamgauging, map production and revision, and 
studies of species and habitats have been proposed for 
decreases.
    The Committee is concerned about this apparent trend and 
directs that the Survey provide a statement defining the 
Survey's vision of its future role. This analysis should 
emphasize the major topical areas that are central to the 
Survey's mission and the types of activities that are needed to 
fulfill that mission. The Survey should comment on its role in 
collecting, managing, and disseminating long-term data sets for 
current and future management and understanding of the 
environment; its role in fundamental research to advance the 
understanding of processes; and its role in assessing the 
status and trends of hazards, resources and the environment. 
The Committee believes that the Survey's mission should 
continue to be a primary provider of scientific research, basic 
data, and assessments, and not shift its focus to becoming an 
information agency disseminating and coordinating the work of 
others.
    The Committee further directs the Survey to comment on the 
status of its investments in its long-term viability. These 
investments should include, at a minimum: (1) hiring of new 
staff to keep the agency current with emerging science and 
technology and building a group of experts who will carry 
forward the traditions of scientific excellence into the 
future; (2) ongoing training of existing staff to upgrade their 
knowledge and skills; (3) investments in new scientific 
instruments for field and laboratory work with improved 
accuracy or timeliness; (4) investment in facilities (new or 
renovated laboratories and offices); and (5) investments in 
information technology to enhance scientific computation and 
delivery of USGS data to users. The Survey should comment on 
recent trends in these investments and the potential impact 
that these levels of investment will have on the future ability 
of the Survey to carry out its mission. In its FY 2001 budget 
submission the Survey should comment on how the proposed budget 
serves to foster the mission of the Survey over the coming 
decades.
    The Committee does not approve the Survey's request to 
establish a new ``Integrated Science'' (place based and DOI 
science) budget activity, but does concur with the Survey's 
proposal for a new ``Science Support'' and ``Facilities'' 
budget activity. The Committee believes that restructuring the 
budget is an iterative process and the decision not to 
establish an ``Integrated Science'' budget activity does not 
preclude the Survey from proposing future modifications to its 
budget structure. The Committee believes that the Survey did 
not adequately gather support for its budget restructuring 
proposals with its partners, and as a result the majority of 
comments from Survey partners were in opposition to the 
restructuring proposals.
    With respect to integrated science, the Committee believes 
that this is primarily a management issue and not a function of 
the structure of the budget. The Committee is dismayed to learn 
that the Survey does not currently engage in integrated 
science. Integrated science is not a new paradigm, and as such, 
the Survey should already be doing both coordinated and 
integrated science projects in support of Survey programs 
across its four divisions, with other Interior bureaus, and 
with other Federal agencies. The Committee is convinced that if 
the Survey's top leadership were committed to doing integrated 
science then any institutional barriers to integrated science 
would be easily overcome.
    The Committee recommends $820,444,000 for surveys, 
investigations, and research, an increase of $21,548,000 above 
the 1999 level and $18,041,000 below the budget request.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table: 


    National mapping program.--The Committee recommends 
$127,610,000 for the national mapping program, a decrease of 
$7,824,000 below the budget request and a decrease of 
$10,705,000 below the 1999 level, including increases from the 
1999 level of $2,510,000 for fixed costs and $2,500,000 for 
data archiving, $450,000 for real time hazards, $500,000 for 
amphibian research, and $100,000 for hyperspectral remote 
sensing and synthetic aperture research in Yellowstone Park. As 
part of the Survey's budget restructuring proposal $9,050,000 
is transferred to the new science support activity and 
$7,715,000 is transferred to the new facilities activity. 
Within the recommendation the Committee has provided $3,000,000 
for the Gateway to the Future--Ohio pilot.
    The Committee has provided the additional $100,000 to 
support the use of NASA hyperspectral remote sensing and 
synthetic aperture radar for scientific research into riverine 
and riparian ecosystems in and around Yellowstone National 
Park.
    Geologic hazards, resources and processes.--The Committee 
recommends $210,081,000 for geologic hazards, resources, and 
processes, an increase of $11,464,000 above the budget request 
and a decrease of $29,069,000 below the 1999 level, including 
increases above the 1999 level of $5,384,000 for fixed costs, 
$2,400,000 for real time hazards ($400,000 for landslides, 
$1,600,000 for earthquakes, and $400,000 for geomagnetism), and 
$500,000 for coastal geology, and decreases of $2,000,000 for 
the minerals at risk program, and $250,000 for Hawaiian Volcano 
program. As part of the Surveys budget restructuring proposal 
$11,744,000 is transferred to the new science support activity 
and $23,359,000 is transferred to the new facilities activity.
    The Committee continues to believe that the Survey's 
highest hazards related priority should be to continue to 
upgrade its various hazards monitoring networks, to acquire 
quality hazards information, and to engage in quality research. 
As part of an overall funding strategy for the Survey, the 
Committee continues to support policies whose aim it is to 
provide quality information to as wide a range of users as 
possible. However, as noted earlier, given current funding 
constraints the Committee is convinced that the Survey should 
first invest in its core research programs. In this light, the 
Committee has provided funding for the Survey's ``Real Time 
Hazards'' initiative but does not agree to provide any 
resources for the Administration's proposed ``Disaster 
Information Network''.
    The Committee has provided the additional $500,000 to the 
Coastal Geology program to undertake a pilot project using the 
Light Distance and Ranging (LIDAR) technology to assist 
compliance with the listing of Chinook Salmon and Summer Chum 
Salmon under the Endangered Species Act. These funds should be 
used in cooperation with Kitsap County to map draining systems, 
stream systems, and to identify potentially unstable slopes. 
This information is important for restoring and maintaining 
healthy habitats for these threatened fish species.
    The Committee is concerned over the lack of attention given 
to the Survey's landslide program. Because of this concern, the 
Survey is directed to develop by September 15, 2000, a 
comprehensive strategy, including the estimated costs 
associated with addressing the widespread landslide hazards 
facing the Nation. The preparation of this strategy should 
include the involvement of all parties having responsibility 
for dealing with the problems associated with landslides.
    Water resources investigations.--The Committee recommends 
$185,301,000 for water resources assessments and research, an 
increase of $12,795,000 above the budget request and a decrease 
of $23,852,000 below the 1999 level, including increases from 
the 1999 level of $6,330,000 for fixed costs, $2,500,000 for 
real time hazards, and $500,000 for amphibian research, and 
decreases of $998,000 for watershed modeling, $250,000 for an 
endocrine disrupter study at Lake Mead and $100,000 for ground 
water monitoring in Hawaii. As part of the Survey's budget 
restructuring proposal $16,443,000 is transferred to the new 
science support activity and $15,391,000 is transferred to the 
new facilities activity.
    Biological research.--The Committee recommends $137,674,000 
for biological research an increase of $12,710,000 above the 
budget request and a decrease of $24,787,000 below the 1999 
level, including increases from the 1999 level of $3,757,000 
for fixed costs, $2,000,000 for amphibian research, and 
$1,000,000 for the cooperative research units, and decreases of 
$6,600,000 for the Alaska grant, $1,000,000 for the incinerator 
replacement, and a transfer of $300,000 for the San Marcos 
field station transfer to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 
As part of the Survey's budget restructuring proposal 
$8,605,000 is transferred to the new science support activity 
and $15,039,000 is transferred to the new facilities activity.
    The Committee understands that with the additional 
resources being provided in fiscal year 2000 the Survey can 
fill all of the remaining vacancies that exist at the 
cooperative research units. Therefore, the Committee directs 
the Survey to use these additional resources to fill as many 
existing positions as possible and in the shortest time 
practicable.
    The Committee encourages the experts at the USGS to begin 
discussions with the National Water Trust (Trust), a public-
private consortium in Chattanooga, Tennessee, about the 
feasibility of the Trust acting as a regional coordinator for 
invasive species. It is the intention of the Trust to leverage 
private sector funding as a mechanism to address the serious 
problems of invasive species at a regional level. Within 6 
months of enactment of this Act the Survey should report back 
to the Committee about the feasibility of the Trust acting as a 
regional coordinator for information management, research, and 
the implementation of a coordinated invasive species strategy.
    Science support.--The Committee recommends $73,996,000 for 
science support, the same as the budget request and an increase 
of $46,688,000 above the 1999 level, including increases from 
the 1999 level of $1,547,000 for fixed costs, and a transfer of 
$45,141,000 which is a net of $701,000 transferred from the 
science support activity into the facilities activity. This is 
the first fiscal year in which all science support activities 
will be funded under one activity. The Committee has taken this 
action to ensure that the internal Survey policy of assessing 
each individual division is discontinued. This new budget 
structure insures both truth in budgeting, and also ensures 
that Survey partners will no longer be assessed for the total 
uncontrollable cost associated with a given research project.
    Facilities.--The Committee recommends $85,782,000 for 
facilities, an increase of $500,000 from the budget request and 
$64,273,000 above the 1999 level, including an increase from 
the 1999 level of $68,000 for fixed costs, $1,500,000 for 
backlog maintenance, $500,000 to address the deteriorating 
conditions at the Wellsboro lab, a transfer of $21,509,000 from 
the old facility activity, and a transfer of $62,205,000 which 
includes the transfer of $701,000 from science support to 
facilities. These are funds included in the old budget 
structure under general administration.

                      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 
2000, MMS expects to collect and distribute about $4 billion 
from more than 80,000 active Federal and Indian leases. In 
addition, about $75 million in unpaid and underpaid royalties 
are expected to be collected through the MMS audit and 
negotiated settlement programs.
    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 few years, MMS has begun 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, 1999...........................      $117,902,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       110,082,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       110,082,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        -7,820,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $110,082,000 for royalty and 
offshore minerals management, the same as the budget request 
and $7,820,000 below the 1999 level. The Committee 
recommendation includes an overall decrease in appropriated 
funds which is being offset by the use of an additional 
$24,000,000 in excess receipts in the OCS lands activity.
    The Committee included an increase of $5,000,000 to 
continue development and implementation of the Royalty 
Management Program reengineering project. This is the second 
phase of a multi-year effort that will provide benefits to the 
Federal government, states, and Indian tribes through reduced 
program costs and improved program operations. In addition, the 
simplified reporting schemes envisioned in the reengineering 
effort are expected to save the minerals industry millions of 
dollars through reduced reporting burden.
    The Committee expects the Service to work with the Center 
for Marine Resources and Environmental Technology at the 
University of Mississippi to determine the extent to which the 
Center's expertise could assist in resource assessments 
relating to potential hydrate production in Federal waters. The 
Service should coordinate with the U.S. Geological Survey and 
the Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Energy Research and 
Development with respect to using the Center's expertise in 
this area.
    Bill language.--Bill language has been included under 
General Provisions, Department of the Interior to prohibit the 
use of funds for Outer Continental Shelf leasing activities in 
several areas. The leasing restrictions included for fiscal 
year 2000 are the same as those in previous fiscal years. The 
Administration has supported continuing these provisions for 
another year, while updating the language to conform to the 
current five-year plan. The areas covered by the Committee's 
recommendation include Northern, Central and Southern 
California, the North Atlantic, Washington-Oregon, Florida, the 
Mid and South Atlantic, and the North Aleutian Basin in Alaska. 
The revision proposed by the Administration, and included by 
the Committee, reflects the inclusion in the five-year plan of 
a sale in a small area offshore Florida and Alabama that was 
previously under moratoria. Language is also included ensuring 
that the full amount of excess receipts will be available.

                           Oil Spill Research




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $6,118,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         6,118,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         6,118,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $6,118,000, 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 the budget 
request.

          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, 1999...........................        93,078,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        94,391,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        95,693,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +2,615,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        +1,302,000


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


    The Committee recommends $95,693,000 for Regulation and 
technology, an increase of $1,302,000 above the request and 
$2,615,000 above the 1999 level. The increased funding should 
cover the OSM fixed cost increases. The Committee has also 
added $1,500,000 to the environmental protection activity by 
transferring $1,000,000 from the AML clean streams cooperative 
agreement program and $500,000 from the AML fee compliance 
program. This transfer will help the States and Tribes meet 
their increased demand and workload requirements as well as 
State uncontrollable fixed costs relating to State and Tribal 
regulatory grants. The increase to the State regulatory grant 
program brings the funding for that activity to $52,200,000.

                    abandoned mine reclamation fund




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $185,416,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       211,158,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       196,458,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       +11,042,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -14,700,000


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


    The Committee recommends $196,458,000 for the Abandoned 
Mine Reclamation fund, $14,700,000 below the request and an 
increase of $11,042,000 above the 1999 level. The Committee 
recognizes the great amount of reclamation work that remains to 
be done, as well as some of the terrible health, safety and 
environmental problems caused by this situation. The Committee 
has provided a substantial increase to this program, and has 
increased the authority for the Appalachian Clean Streams 
Initiative to a total of $8,000,000. The increased funding 
should cover the OSM fixed cost increases. The Committee has 
not approved the Administration's request to insert bill 
language altering the formula for distributing the increased 
funding provided for AML activities. In order to assist the 
State regulatory programs which have had static funding for 
several years, the Committee has transferred $1,000,000 from 
the environmental restoration activity and $500,000 from the 
fee compliance portion of the financial management activity to 
the regulation and technology appropriation. The Committee has 
also added $300,000 in new funds above the 1999 level to 
provide a grant specifically for the purpose of conducting a 
demonstration project in western Pennsylvania to determine the 
efficacy of improving water quality by removing metals from 
eligible waters polluted by acid mine drainage.

                        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 area offices and 83 agency offices. In 
addition, the Bureau provides education programs to Native 
Americans through the operation of 118 day schools, 48 boarding 
schools, and 14 dormitories. Lastly, the Bureau administers 
more than 46 million acres of tribally owned land.

                      operation of indian programs





Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................    $1,584,124,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................     1,694,387,000
Recommended, 1999.....................................     1,631,050,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       +46,926,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -63,337,000


    The Committee recommends $1,631,050,000 for the operation 
of Indian programs, an increase of $46,926,000 above the fiscal 
year 1999 level and a decrease of $63,337,000 from the budget 
estimate. The Committee agrees to all internal transfers and 
budget structure changes proposed by the BIA in the budget 
request. As a result of significant budgetary constraints 
arising from the balanced budget agreement limited funding has 
been provided to address the Bureau's uncontrollable cost 
increases to provide the same level of services to the tribes 
as that provided during fiscal year 1999. In addition to 
uncontrollable cost increases, the Committee has provided 
limited funding increases for priority programs. The Committee 
has taken this action so as to provide enough room in the 
budget to fund fully the Administration's request to fix the 
long-standing problems associated with management of the Indian 
trust funds. The Committee is convinced that for the first time 
there exists a nexus between the Administration, the Department 
of the Interior, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the Congress 
to implement fully the High Level Implementation Plan and put 
in place the necessary accounting systems, records management, 
people, and training to provide Indian account holders with 
accurate statements of their resources.
    The Committee did not provide any funds for the 
Administration's school bonding initiative. The Committee notes 
that before any money can be provided for this new program, the 
legislative Committees of jurisdiction in the House and Senate 
need to first enact the tax credit portion of the initiative. 
Without the tax provisions, tribes have no authority to issue 
these types of school bonds. At such time as the tax provisions 
are enacted into law, the Committee will reconsider its 
decision not to provide funding for the school bonding 
initiative.
    The Committee has made a number of changes to the Operation 
of Indian Programs (OIP) account bill language. These changes 
are not meant to signal a reduction in the number of programs 
in OIP, nor are they meant to limit the types of programs 
within OIP. The Committee's intent is simply to condense the 
language.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table: 


    Tribal priority allocations.--The Committee recommends 
$698,395,000 for tribal priority allocations, a decrease of 
$17,780,000 below the budget request and a decrease of $649,000 
below the 1999 level, including increases above the 1999 level 
of $13,661,000 for fixed costs and $5,000,000 for the Indian 
Self-Determination Fund, and decreases of $120,000 for employee 
displacement costs and $19,190,000 resulting from internal 
transfers.
    The Committee has concerns about reprogramming and transfer 
actions that would frustrate the Committee's support for trust 
system improvements. Therefore, real estate services and real 
estate appraisal funds within Tribal Priority Allocations are 
not to be reprogrammed without Committee approval. Further, 
probate backlog reduction funds within Non-recurring Programs 
and land records improvement funds within Area Office 
Operations are not available for transfer into the base budget 
of any tribe.
    The Committee established the BIA/Tribal Priority 
Allocations (TPA) work group to analyze the distribution of TPA 
funds and to develop a new distribution method if warranted. 
The work group was directed also to analyze and develop a 
methodology for measuring tribal needs on a program-by-program 
basis. The Committee has not as yet received the TPA report, 
but has received a separate tribal report. If the tribes did 
not agree with the Bureau's analysis and recommendations they 
could have written a minority opinion as an addendum to the 
official report. However, when resources were provided for this 
effort, the Committee did not envision that Federal funds would 
be allocated to the tribal representatives of the work group so 
that they could develop their own study.
    The Committee believes that this was an unwarranted use of 
these funds, and expects the Bureau to maintain tighter control 
and oversight in the future. The Committee believes that tribal 
participation in these efforts is concluded, but what this 
process has shown is that the Bureau needs to provide better 
and faster responses to this Committee and other Committees of 
the Congress. Therefore, $250,000 provided under TPA is 
specifically identified for the establishment of an office of 
policy analysis and planning in support of program reform 
efforts, and to provide more timely response to the Congress 
where policy analysis is needed. Within 60 days of enactment of 
this Act, the Bureau is to provide to the Committee an 
assessment of its most pressing policy issues and a work plan 
detailing what specific projects the Bureau will undertake 
during fiscal year 2000.
    Other recurring programs.--The Committee recommends 
$559,554,000 for other recurring programs, a decrease of 
$20,642,000 from the budget request and an increase of 
$17,515,000 above the 1999 level, including increases from the 
1999 level of $8,378,000 for fixed costs, $5,000,000 for Indian 
School Equalization Program (ISEP) funds, $1,000,000 for the 
Tribally Controlled Community Colleges, $3,062,000 for the 
timber-fish-wildlife project in Washington State. This increase 
provides a total program level of $4,000,000, and $75,000 
resulting from internal transfers.
    Non-recurring programs.--The Committee recommends 
$65,206,000 for non-recurring programs, a decrease of 
$5,984,000 from the budget request and an increase of 
$1,056,000 above the 1999 level, including increases from the 
1999 level of $737,000 for fixed costs, $592,000 for Gila River 
Farms, and $100,000 for the Lake Roosevelt Council, and 
decreases of $100,000 for the St. Augustine Center and $273,000 
resulting from 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 
$47,750,000 for central office operations, the same as the 
budget request and an increase of $2,011,000 above the 1999 
level, including increases from the 1999 level of $1,019,000 
for fixed costs, $592,000 resulting from internal transfers, 
and $400,000 to establish a coordinating office for alcohol and 
substance abuse.
    Area office operations.--The Committee recommends 
$43,938,000 for area office operations, an increase of 
$1,495,000 above the budget request and an increase of $998,000 
above the 1999 level, including an increase from the 1999 level 
of $1,457,000 for fixed costs and a decrease of $459,000 
resulting from internal transfers.
    Special programs and pooled overhead.--The Committee 
recommends $216,243,000 for special programs and pooled 
overhead, a decrease of $20,426,000 below the budget request 
and an increase of $25,995,000 above the 1999 level, including 
increases from the 1999 level of $6,740,000 for fixed costs and 
$19,255,000 resulting from internal transfers.
    Within the funds provided for special programs and pooled 
overhead, $108,000 is provided for the United Sioux Tribe 
Development Corporation, $524,000 for the National Ironworkers 
Training Program, and $100,000 for the continuation of the 
Cooperative Distance Learning Telecommunications project with 
the Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute and Lockheed 
Martin Corporation.
    In fiscal year 2000, the Bureau should continue to pay for 
and provide for current levels of service to the Office of 
Special Trustee (OST) for Information Resource Management 
systems and other contractual costs to support existing 
mainframe computers, licenses, and other costs similar to 
previous years. The Committee recognizes that BIA's IRM 
resources are limited and that system enhancements may be 
needed by both BIA and OST trust systems. The Committee expects 
that investments in information technology will be implemented 
in a coordinated and cost effective manner that ensures no 
duplication of resources between BIA and OST, particularly in 
the area of telecommunications.
    Bill language.--Bill language has been included under the 
Bureau's Administrative Provisions to allow tribes to return 
their appropriated funds to the Bureau for redistribution; 
while not limiting the ability of a tribe to seek future 
funding. Bill language has also been included under General 
Provisions, Department of the Interior which makes permanent 
the provision that limits payment of contract support costs to 
contracts under the jurisdiction of the Department.
    Bill language is included under Department of the Interior 
General Provisions, to allow the Department to appoint 
Administrative Law Judges for time-limited appointments in 
order to reduce and eventually eliminate the backlog of Indian 
probate cases. Currently, the Department has in excess 7,000 
cases to be probated. This flexibility will allow for the 
hiring of experienced attorneys on a part time basis, temporary 
or other appointment status to meet the challenges of 
eliminating the probate backlog.
    The Department and the Bureau are to be commended for 
aggressively reviewing the current procedures for adjudicating 
Indian probate cases. The Committee expects the results of that 
review to result in streamlined procedures, and if necessary, 
substantive legislative changes.

                              construction




Appropriation enacted, 1999.............................    $123,421,000
Budget estimate, 2000...................................     174,258,000
Recommended, 2000.......................................     126,023,000
    Comparison:.........................................
    Appropriation, 1999.................................      +2,602,000
    Budget estimate, 2000...............................     -48,235,000


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


    Education.--The Committee recommends $60,503,000 for 
education construction a decrease of $47,874,000 below the 
budget request and an increase of $103,000 above the 1999 level 
for fixed costs. This funding level provides $17,485,000 to 
begin construction of the Seba Dalkai Boarding School and the 
Shiprock Alternative School which are the next two schools on 
the priority list. The Bureau should report back to the 
Committee as soon as practicable with its recommendation on how 
these funds should be allocated. Even though the Administration 
has a policy of funding the total cost of a school construction 
in the year the project is being proposed, the Committee is 
concerned that this policy results in schools being funded out 
of order with the Bureau's own school construction priority 
list. The Committee believes that the Administration needs to 
be more sensitive to those tribes who have waited years until 
their school is next on the priority list and those tribes who 
are still waiting to get on the priority list. The Committee 
does not agree with the Bureau's request to reduce the FI&R; 
funding level by $4,000,000. Given the significant maintenance 
backlog in the Bureau's school system the Committee has 
restored this proposed cut.
    The Committee has continued bill language carried since 
fiscal year 1995 related to implementing the process to award 
grants for construction of new schools or facilities 
improvement and repair projects in excess of $100,000. The 
language ensures that the Department can continue to implement 
the grant process while the permanent implementation process is 
under development in fiscal year 2000.
    The Committee expects the Department and the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs to continue to work cooperatively with the 
tribes in the development of a final implementation process. 
Given that the language is clear concerning negotiating the 
schedule of payments, the Committee has not continued the 
language limiting payments to two per year.
    The Committee has been advised that the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs, the Department of Justice, the Puyallup tribe, and the 
Chief Leschi school have reached a settlement on overpayment of 
Chief Leschi school expenses. Collection of these overpayments 
will occur over the next several years and the Committee 
expects that these funds be used to support school 
construction.
    Public safety and justice.--The Committee recommends 
$5,564,000 for public safety and justice, the same as the 
budget request and an increase above the 1999 level of $14,000 
for fixed costs.
    Resources management.--The Committee recommends $51,823,000 
for resources management, the same as the budget request and an 
increase of $2,203,000 above the 1999 level, including 
increases from the 1999 level of $190,000 for fixed costs and 
$2,013,000 for the safety of dams program.
    General administration.--The Committee recommends 
$8,133,000 for general administration and construction 
management, a decrease of $361,000 below the budget request and 
an increase of $282,000 above the 1999 level for fixed costs.

 indian land and water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to 
                                indians




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $28,882,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        28,401,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        25,901,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        -2,981,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -2,500,000


    The Committee recommends $25,901,000 for Indian land and 
water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to Indians, 
a decrease of $2,500,000 from the budget request and a decrease 
of $2,981,000, from the 1999 level. The Committee 
recommendation includes $625,000 for White Earth, $246,000 for 
Hoopa-Yurok, $25,000,000 for the Ute settlement, and $30,000 
for Pyramid Lake.

                 indian guaranteed loan program account




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $5,001,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         5,008,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         5,008,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................            +7,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $5,008,000 for the Indian 
guaranteed loan program the same as the budget request and an 
increase of $7,000 from the 1999 level.

                    indian land consolidation pilot

    This account was funded in fiscal year 1999 under the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs but, to consolidate all trust reform 
activities, it is moved to the Office of Special Trustee for 
American Indians for fiscal year 2000.

                          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 (RMA) 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, 1999...........................       $66,175,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        68,075,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        66,320,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          +145,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -1,755,000


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


    Territorial Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$15,546,000, which is $1,755,000 below the request and $145,000 
above the 1999 level. The Committee continues to feel that the 
small, focused grants awarded through the technical assistance 
program are some of the most cost effective ways of helping the 
territories and freely associated states. The Committee is 
encouraged by work on the brown tree snake, and has maintained 
the increases provided in each of the past two years. The 
Committee has not been adequately informed about the role of 
the Department and the OIA in the new coral reef initiative. 
The Committee will wait to fund this new work until a clear 
package is developed which clarifies various Federal agency 
roles, including the Department of the Interior, and the 
territorial governments and the governments of the freely 
associated states.
    American Samoa.--The Committee recommends $23,054,000, 
which is equal to the request and the 1999 level for operations 
grants. The Committee remains very concerned about continuing 
fiscal problems in American Samoa. The Committee will wait on 
innovative funding schemes for the American Samoa government 
until it takes more decisive action to control its costs and 
payroll, and enhance its revenues in accordance with the 
previous recommendations from the joint working group and any 
new financial recovery plan that may be developed.
    Guam.--The Committee notes the $4,580,000 payment to Guam 
using Covenant grant funds is to address the impact resulting 
from the implementation of the compact of Free Association.
    Northern Mariana Islands/Covenant grants.--The Committee 
recommends $27,720,000, which is equal to the request and the 
1999 level for CNMI covenant grants. The Committee remains very 
concerned about the labor and immigration situation in the 
CNMI. The Committee will be working with the GAO as it 
evaluates the CNMI economy as directed by the Committee last 
year. The Committee is encouraged by the very recent efforts of 
the CNMI to implement the capital improvement program. The 
Committee has deferred $5,000,000 for CNMI construction by 
extending the terms of Public Law 94-241 relative to CNMI an 
additional year so that this amount will be provided to CNMI in 
fiscal year 2003. At the rate that CNMI is obligating 
construction grants, a reduction of this amount in the current 
fiscal year should have no harmful impacts on its construction 
plans. CNMI payments for fiscal years 2001 and 2002 shall 
remain at $11,000,000. However, if the CNMI does not make 
progress on its capital investments, as well as its labor and 
immigration problems, the Committee may revisit these fund 
distributions in the future.
    The Committee has provided bill language to redirect this 
$5,000,000 in mandatory funding during fiscal year 2000 for 
additional compact assistance for Guam.

                      compact of free association




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $20,930,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        20,545,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        20,545,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          -385,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $20,545,000, which is the same as 
the request and $385,000 below the 1999 level. The Committee 
has reduced the Enewetak support payment as requested by the 
Administration.

                        Departmental Management


                         salaries and expenses




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $64,686,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        63,064,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        62,864,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        -1,822,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................          -200,000


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


    The Committee recommends $62,864,000 for fiscal year 2000, 
$1,822,000 below the enacted level and $200,000 below the 
fiscal year 2000 request. The Committee has urged the 
Department to reduce unnecessary administrative practices that 
consume a large amount of staff time such as chain of review, 
concurrence and sign-offs for correspondence and for 
programmatic documents. The Committee understands that many of 
these old and cumbersome practices continue.
    The Committee expects that, as levels of review are reduced 
and employees are empowered to do their jobs, many positions 
will be eliminated. These positions should not be converted 
into additional program staff but should truly result in a 
reduction of FTEs. This reduction should be a direct result of 
improved management decisions. The Committee is aware that the 
Departmental Management staff is augmented with personnel 
details from other bureau offices.

                        Office of the Solicitor


                         salaries and expenses




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $36,784,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        41,500,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        36,784,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -4,716,000


    The Committee recommends $36,784,000 for fiscal year 2000, 
the same as the enacted level.

                      Office of Inspector General


                         salaries and expenses




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $25,486,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        27,614,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        26,086,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          +600,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -1,528,000


    The Committee recommends $26,086,000, $600,000 above the 
enacted level and $1,528,000 below the fiscal year 2000 
request. The increase above the 1999 level is for fixed costs.

             Office of Special Trustee for American Indians


                         Federal trust programs




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $61,299,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        90,025,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        90,025,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       +28,726,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $90,025,000 for the Office of the 
Special Trustee for American Indians an increase of $28,726,000 
above the 1999 level and the same as the budget request. The 
Committee has provided $1,663,000 for Executive Direction and 
$88,362,000 for Program Operations, Support and Improvements.
    In oversight hearings before this Committee, both the 
Secretary of the Interior and the Assistant Secretary for 
Indian Affairs stated that fixing the problems associated with 
management of the Indian trust fund systems were their highest 
priorities, and that, if necessary, they would forgo funding 
for other priority items in their budget to see adequate 
funding provided for implementation of the High Level 
Implementation Plan.
    The problems of Indian trust fund management are long-
standing and enormously complex, and, as GAO reported in 1994, 
their resolution requires a sustained commitment of both 
Congress and the Administration. The Committee is convinced 
that for the first time a real nexus exists between the Bureau 
of Indian Affairs, The Office of Special Trustee for American 
Indians, the Department of the Interior, and the Congress to 
put in place the necessary accounting systems, records 
management, people, and training to implement fully the High 
Level Implementation Plan to provide Indian account holders 
with accurate statements of their resources.
    This Committee has been actively involved in oversight of 
trust reform since the 1980s, and believes the commitment and 
leadership currently in place is unprecedented, and represents 
a unique opportunity to resolve long-standing Indian trust 
management problems. Because the learning curve for trust 
reform is so steep, the Committee believes that the prospects 
of trust reform would be diminished if reforms are 
significantly delayed beyond 2000 and hence has provided the 
full amount as requested by the Administration.
    Bill language has been included allowing the transfer of 
funds to Departmental Management. The Committee understands 
that any such transfer of funds will be used by the Office of 
Hearings and Appeals to reduce the Bureau of Indian Affairs 
probate backlog. While the Committee supports such efforts, it 
nevertheless directs that any such transfers be submitted to 
the Committee for its approval under the established 
reprogramming procedures.

                    indian land consolidation pilot

                       Indian Land Consolidation




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $5,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        10,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         5,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -5,000,000


    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the Indian land 
consolidation pilot, the same as the 1999 level and a decrease 
of $5,000,000 below the budget request.

           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.
    This account, prior to fiscal year 1999, was included under 
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service appropriation. The 
account was moved to the Departmental Offices appropriation 
because its functions relate to several different bureaus 
within the Department of the Interior.




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $4,492,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         7,900,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         5,400,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          +908,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -2,500,000


    The Committee recommends $5,400,000 for the natural 
resource damage assessment fund, a decrease of $2,500,000 below 
the budget request and an increase of $908,000 above the fiscal 
year 1999 level. Decreases below the budget request include 
$2,175,000 in damage assessments and $325,000 in program 
management.

             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.
    Section 107 prohibits the expenditure of funds for Outer 
Continental Shelf leasing activities in certain areas as 
proposed in the budget. These provisions are addressed under 
the Minerals Management Service in this report.
    Section 108 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 109 provides authority through fiscal year 2002 for 
lump sum payments of severance pay and continued health 
benefits to Federal Helium Operations employees who have been 
separated as a result of the closure of the helium program.
    Section 110 makes permanent a limitation on the payment of 
contract support costs for certain Indian contracts, using 
funding in this title, to contracts under the jurisdiction of 
agencies of the Department of the Interior.
    Section 111 prohibits the National Park Service from 
reducing recreation fees for non-local travel through any park 
unit.
    Section 112 provides permanent authority to the Secretary 
to lease space to non-Federal entities and to collect and 
retain fees for the Working Capital Fund.
    Section 113 changes the name of the Steel Industry American 
Heritage Area to the ``Rivers of Steel National Heritage 
Area''.
    Section 114 permits the retention of rebates from credit 
card services for deposit to the Departmental Working Capital 
Fund.
    Section 115 permits the transfer of funds between the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee for 
American Indians for the Trust Management Improvement Project 
High Level Implementation Plan.
    Section 116 exempts properties at the Fort Baker, Golden 
Gate National Recreation Area from certain taxes and special 
assessments.
    Section 117 permits the retention of proceeds from 
agreements and leases at the Fort Baker, Golden Gate National 
Recreation Area for preservation, restoration, operation, 
maintenance, interpretation and related activities.
    Section 118 requires the renewal of grazing permits in the 
Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area and directs the 
National Park Service to manage grazing use to protect 
recreational, natural and cultural resources.
    Section 119 requires the renewal of grazing permits by the 
Bureau of Land Management while the Bureau completes on-site 
environmental assessments.
    Section 120 allows for the hiring of administrative law 
judges to address the Indian probate backlog.

                       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, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. 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 156 National forests, 20 National 
grasslands, a National tallgrass prairie, 4 National monuments, 
and 9 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.
    The Committee remains concerned about the management 
accountability and performance of the Forest Service and the 
Department of Agriculture. The Committee is concerned that fund 
transfers to the Department of Agriculture have not been a 
predictable and transparent part of the budgeting process. Far 
too much funding, with little Congressional control or 
knowledge, has been transferred for administrative functions of 
the Department that perhaps should be funded with the normal 
Department of Agriculture appropriations. The Committee is 
concerned that the Department may not be fully implementing the 
provision included in previous appropriations acts that 
requires repayment for detailees used for more than 30 days. 
The Committee has required Congressional approval before any 
funds may be transferred for the working capital fund. The 
Department and the Forest Service may be duplicating accounting 
management functions and unduly increasing staffing at 
headquarters to the detriment of on-the-ground management. The 
Committee will continue to monitor closely and control these 
administrative functions until and unless the Department of 
Agriculture and the Forest Service offer more clear and cost-
efficient management.
    The accountability problems of the Forest Service are much 
more of a problem than just bad accounting. The Committee notes 
that performance measures and their use in management are 
under-utilized by Forest Service leaders. The Committee also 
finds the accountability problem troubling as it relates to 
Congressional direction, in either the bill or report. The 
Committee believes that this problem can be directly 
attributable to a lack of leadership on the part of both the 
Forest Service and the Department of Agriculture. When 
Congressional instructions are provided the Committee expects 
these instructions to be closely monitored and followed. In the 
future, the Committee directs that earmarks for Congressional 
funding priorities be first allocated to the receiving units, 
and then the remaining funds should be allocated to the field 
or management unit based on established Forest Service 
procedures. Field units or programs should not have their 
allocations reduced because of earmarks for Congressional 
priorities. The Committee is prepared to provide bill language 
that provides detailed funding instructions for every dollar in 
the Forest Service budget should these instructions be ignored.
    The Committee has made several changes to enhance 
accountability and increase Congressional involvement with 
Forest Service management of funds. The Committee has included 
bill language to control departmental assessments for 
administrative functions and working capital funds.
    Last year the Committee commissioned the National Academy 
of Public Administration (NAPA) to do a review of the Forest 
Service efforts to modernize its fiscal procedures and evaluate 
the budget structures and process of the agency. The Committee 
will work with the NAPA and the Forest Service to implement 
recommendations from this study once it is complete. Until that 
time, the Committee has only implemented minor budget 
restructuring which joins maintenance and construction 
functions in a new reconstruction and maintenance appropriation 
account.
    The Committee remains concerned that the Forest Service 
still has not made sufficient progress with establishing 
understandable, repeatable measures that demonstrate to the 
public and the Congress what work is being accomplished with 
annual appropriations. There remains an urgent need for 
tactical measures which can be used as a basis to determine 
successful or inferior annual performance of the broad and 
difficult multiple use mission of the Forest Service. Long term 
strategic measures may well involve slow-changing health of the 
land and waters, but annual measures should involve outputs as 
well as outcomes. The Committee reiterates its previous 
direction that the budget formulation and allocation processes 
must be linked closely to the forest plans, and vise versa. 
This will allow realistic budget requests that related to on-
the-ground work with performance accountability, and allow the 
Congress to understand more fully the consequences of various 
funding alternatives.

                     forest and rangeland research

    Forest and rangeland research conducts research through a 
network of six regional research and/or experiment stations, a 
National forest products laboratory, and the International 
Institute for Tropical Forestry. 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, 1999...........................      $197,444,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       234,644,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       204,373,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +6,929,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -30,271,000


    The Committee recommends $204,373,000 for forest and 
rangeland research, $30,271,000 below the budget request and 
$6,929,000 above the 1999 funding level. The Committee supports 
the importance of science and research for both public and 
other land management, but the Committee does not have the 
resources available to fund the massive increases requested 
this year. The Committee has provided no funding for new 
program starts such as the climate change technology initiative 
nor increases requested for the global change program. The 
funding increase above the 1999 level includes $5,000,000 to 
enhance the forest inventory and analysis (FIA) program. Other 
than as noted below, the remainder of the increase is to offset 
partially fixed cost increases. The Committee expects Forest 
Service scientists to be available for participation in NFS 
efforts requiring scientific advise and analysis without 
repayment for services from the NFS. The Committee recommends 
$200,000 for the ``CROP'' project on the Colville National 
Forest, $300,000 for the landscape management project at the 
University of Washington, and $200,000 for special research 
needs documenting changes in the twenty years since Mt. St. 
Helens exploded. The Coweeta ecological research site funding 
should be no less than the fiscal year 1999 level.
    The increased funding for the FIA program should be focused 
on cost share opportunities. This funding should go towards 
collecting field-level plot data, stressing those States which 
have demonstrated a commitment through cash or in-kind 
contributions to the program. The FIA staff should work closely 
with the national forest system staff and the Natural Resources 
Conservation Service, national rangeland inventory so as to 
ensure consistency of inventory data and methods across 
ownerships.
    The Committee is concerned about the potentially high 
initial costs in some regions of the country of implementing 
the requirements of section 253(c) of the Agricultural Research 
Extension and Education Reform Act of 1998, which mandates that 
20 percent of inventory plots be measured annually to achieve a 
five year inventory cycle. The Committee, therefore, supports 
agreements between the Forest Service and State foresters to 
flexibly apply the standards of section 253(c) in order to 
accommodate unique State needs and unique regional forest 
conditions.

                       State and private forestry

    Through cooperative programs with State and local 
governments, forest industry and private landowners, the Forest 
Service helps to protect and manage 805 million acres of forest 
and associated watershed land. Technical and financial 
assistance is offered to improve fire management, insect and 
disease control; improve harvesting, processing and monitoring 
of forest products; and stimulate reforestation and timber 
stand improvement. 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, 1999...........................      $170,722,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       252,422,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       181,464,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       +10,742,000



    imate, 2000.......................................       -70,958,000


    The Committee recommends $181,464,000 for State and private 
forestry, $70,958,000 below the budget request and $10,742,000 
above the 1999 funding level.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table: 


    Forest health management.--The Committee recommends 
$62,025,000 for forest health management, $300,000 above the 
request and $7,500,000 above the 1999 funding level for these 
activities. The Committee remains very concerned with forest 
health in the broad sense; the funding level for Federal lands 
forest health management maintains recent funding increases and 
fully funds fixed cost increases as well as requested program 
increases. It is vital that the Forest Service provide all 
Federal land managers with quality, timely insect and disease 
expertise, inventories, and where needed, control so as to 
protect Federal lands and investments and also protect 
neighboring private, tribal or State lands. The Committee notes 
that it is not the Federal role to provide funds to States, 
tribes or citizens to directly manage non-Federal lands for 
conditions related to past pest outbreaks. The Committee is 
concerned with the great amount of time it has taken to develop 
and verify national risk-rating maps. Such maps and associated 
data are vital to help the Congress and the public set 
priorities for scarce forest management funding resources. The 
Committee directs the Forest Service to complete the insect and 
disease risk maps by November 1, 1999, keep them up-to-date, 
and provide the Congress with updated maps at least on a semi-
annual basis thereafter.
    The Committee recommends $21,700,000 for cooperative lands 
forest health management, $300,000 above the request and 
$4,500,000 above the 1999 funding level. Funding for the 
cooperative lands forest health management activity should 
fully fund the Slow-the-spread gypsy moth program. The 
Committee has added $300,000 above the base for assistance 
activities related to the Asian long-horn beetle and similar 
insect problems in New York City, Chicago, and other urban 
centers. The Committee urges the Forest Service to continue to 
take a comprehensive forest health view and include substantial 
efforts to manage and control noxious, exotic and alien plants 
on NFS lands. The Committee urges the Forest Service to 
integrate fully forest health inventories and management 
actions into National forest land management plans and make 
such information consistent with Forest Inventory and Analysis 
for all land ownerships.
    Cooperative fire protection.--The Committee recommends 
$29,150,000 for cooperative fire protection, $5,640,000 above 
the 1999 funding level and $4,360,000 below the budget request 
for these activities. The Committee recommends an increase of 
$3,640,000 for State fire assistance above the 1999 funding 
level. The Committee recognizes and applauds the successful 
partnership of the Forest Service and the States at wildfire 
management. The Committee has also doubled the 1999 allocation 
to the volunteer fire assistance program to a funding level of 
$4,000,000. Volunteers not only provide vital assistance to 
their home districts, but it is in the Federal interest to have 
these firefighters equipped with compatible gear so they can be 
effective members of multi-agency wildfire teams during 
emergencies.
    Cooperative forestry.--The Committee recommends $90,289,000 
for cooperative forestry, $66,898,000 below the budget request 
and $2,398,000 below the 1999 funding level. Given the limited 
resources available, the Committee has focused resources on 
Federal technical assistance programs rather than the massive, 
over 600 percent, increase requested for conservation easement 
purchases through the States with the forest legacy program. 
Similarly, the Committee has been provided with no decent 
rationale to transfer $10,000,000 from the stewardship 
incentive program, as requested, to the USDA rural business 
cooperative program. The Committee strongly suggests that any 
future requests of this nature be referred to the proper 
appropriations subcommittee. The Committee has inadequate 
resources to fund the stewardship incentives program. The 
Committee recommends $29,430,000 for forest stewardship; this 
provides full funding for the budget request and an increase 
above the request of $300,000 for activities in the New York 
City watershed and $300,000 for the Northeast Pennsylvania 
community forestry program. The Committee recommends $7,040,000 
for the forest legacy program, $28,000 above the 1999 level; 
the increase covers fixed costs. The Committee directs the 
Forest Service to allocate forest legacy funding to those 
projects which enhance Federal lands, Federal investments or 
complement past Federal assistance efforts. The Committee 
recommends $32,000,000 for the urban and community forestry 
activity, $1,460,000 above the 1999 funding level and 
$8,040,000 below the request. This recommendation includes 
$250,000, as requested, to support the Northeastern 
Pennsylvania community forestry program and maintains the 
Chicago wilderness program at the 1999 level. The Committee 
continues to believe that a primary purpose of the cooperative 
forestry program is to provide advanced, Federal technical 
assistance to States, tribes and citizens. Therefore, the 
Committee opposes block grants to States as a substitute for 
this appropriation.
    The Committee recommends $13,819,000 for economic action 
programs, $2,486,000 below the request and $3,486,000 below the 
1999 level. Within the economic action program the Committee 
recommends the following distribution of funds:




Economic recovery.....................................        $3,925,000
Rural development.....................................         5,000,000
Forest products conservation and recycling............           950,000
Wood in transportation................................         1,000,000
Water quality:
    Lake Tahoe erosion control grants.................         1,000,000
    New York City watershed enhancement...............           500,000
Hood River, OR, beach facilities......................           275,000
The Dalles, OR, riverfront trail......................         1,169,000


    The Committee directs the Forest Service to maintain the 
Four Corners Initiative and the allocation for rural 
development in the northeast and midwest at the 1999 levels. 
The Committee also notes that the Port of Hood River has 
contributed large amounts of funds and land resources to 
further the purposes of the Columbia River Gorge National 
Scenic Area Act. The recommended funds are authorized by this 
Act; the funds will complete bathroom facilities at a major 
recreation site in the national scenic area which will not only 
serve visitors to the national scenic area, but will also 
reduce demands on other less developed and more environmentally 
sensitive lands nearby within the national forest system. 
Similarly, the funds for The Dalles riverfront trail complement 
other funds from a large variety of State, county, private and 
Federal highway fund sources. This trail will connect major 
Federal installations at the upstream entrance to the Columbia 
River Gorge. The Committee also recommends $8,000,000 for the 
Pacific Northwest Assistance programs, $1,000,000 above the 
request and $1,000,000 below the 1999 level.
    International forestry.--The Committee has not provided 
specific funding for international forestry activities. The 
Committee recommends that the Forest Service may spend up to 
$3,500,000, the same as in 1999, to cover vital international 
forestry activities as authorized. The House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations should be notified of the funding 
mix used. The Committee is encouraged by the successful 
partnerships instituted and planned in the international 
program.

                         National Forest System

    Within the National Forest System (NFS), which covers 192 
million acres, there are 51 Congressionally designated areas, 
including 19 National recreation areas, and 7 National scenic 
areas. The NFS includes a substantial amount of the Nation's 
softwood inventory. 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. Recreational use 
of National forest land amounted to approximately 859 million 
visits in 1997. The NFS includes over 125,000 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 300 threatened or endangered species. 
Half of the Nation's big game 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, 1999...........................    $1,298,570,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................     1,357,178,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................     1,254,434,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       -44,136,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................      -102,744,000


    The Committee recommends $1,254,434,000 for the national 
forest system, $102,744,000 below the budget request and 
$44,136,000 below the 1999 funding level. As requested, the 
Committee has moved the facility and trail maintenance 
activities out of the National forest system account in order 
to increase program oversight and efficiency. This transfer 
accounts for most of the apparent funding reduction below the 
1999 enacted level. The Committee also notes that there were 
numerous technical errors in presentation of the President's 
official budget appendix by the Office of Management and 
Budget, including a $75,669,000 disconnect between the agency 
budget justification and the level indicated in the President's 
budget appendix. The Committee has corrected this error with an 
entry in the detail table below. It is not helpful to the 
Committee to have to evaluate budget presentations for 
technical deficiencies, so the Committee requests that the 
administration increase its proof-reading and validation 
efforts and also submit official corrections to errors once 
found.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table: 


    Land management planning.--The Committee recommends 
$42,000,000 for land management planning, $2,000,000 above the 
1999 level and $8,000,000 below the request. This funding is 
provided for National forest and grassland planning, including 
plan amendments, revisions, and updates. The Committee is 
retaining this as a separate activity because this offers the 
best means of achieving some cost accountability and control 
for the endless planning efforts engaged in by the Forest 
Service. The Committee is concerned that the Forest Service 
apparently ignored the Committee direction during fiscal year 
1999 that funding for the Sierra Nevada framework planning and 
science effort be limited to $2,000,000. Therefore, the 
Committee has not provided the requested funding increase for 
planning or inventory. It is essential that the Forest Service 
learn to manage its programs, especially planning efforts, 
within available resources. Far too much funding and personnel 
efforts have been side-tracked into massive and unending 
planning and assessment exercises. The Forest Service shall not 
use other program funding for forest planning absent approved 
reprogramming requests. The Committee is still waiting for new 
forest planning regulations to be completed over six years 
since the effort began. The Committee expects the Forest 
Service to include in the new planning regulations guidance 
linking forest land management plans to budget realities. The 
updated forest plans should incorporate realistic budgetary 
projections and should include a realistic outline of the 
program of work, and resulting costs, that are being projected 
and planned.
    Inventory and monitoring.--The Committee recommends 
$82,000,000 for inventory and monitoring, $6,114,000 below the 
request and $1,286,000 above the 1999 level.
    Recreation use.--The Committee recommends $199,135,000 for 
recreation use, $4,558,000 above the budget request and 
$11,548,000 above the 1999 level. The Committee has included 
$155,000,000 for the recreation management subactivity, 
$10,047,000 above both the request and the 1999 level.
    The Committee is encouraged by the creative and responsive 
efforts of the Forest Service to implement the recreation fee 
demonstration program. The Committee notes that the Forest 
Service has altered substantially a number of projects in 
response to the public. Despite the overall scarcity of 
resources available to the Committee, the Committee has 
allocated a substantial increase for recreation management 
above the request and has also included bill language in Title 
III which should allow the agency to administer and serve the 
public better for various special land uses. The Challenge Cost 
Share (CCS) program funding for recreation use should be no 
less than the 1999 level. The Committee has provided increases 
above the 1999 level for both wilderness management and 
heritage resources in order to cover fully fixed cost 
increases. The Committee recognizes the National significance 
of the Pacific Crest, Continental Divide, and Florida National 
Scenic Trails and the Nez Perce National Historic Trail and 
directs that funding for their management be no less than the 
1999 level. Similarly, funding should be maintained at least at 
the 1999 level for those parts of the Appalachian, North 
Country and Ice Age National Scenic Trails and the Lewis & 
Clark, Santa Fe, Iditarod, Oregon, California, and Pony Express 
and Overmountain Victory National Historic trails managed by 
the Forest Service.
    Wildlife, fish and rare plant habitat management.--The 
Committee recommends $103,525,000 for wildlife, fish and rare 
plant habitat management, $20,251,000 below the request and 
$3,149,000 above the 1999 level. The increase above the 1999 
level is to offset partially fixed cost increases. The CCS 
program funding should be at least at the 1999 levels and 
should not be subordinated to other internal overhead or 
program management uses. The Committee notes that funds may be 
used for important habitat work off the national forest system 
if it helps improve Federal investments or lands.
    Rangeland management.--The Committee recommends $59,882,000 
for rangeland management, $5,168,000 below the budget request 
but an increase of $2,832,000 above the 1999 funding level. The 
increased funding over 1999 is provided for fixed cost 
increases; $400,000 of the increase in the rangeland vegetation 
management activity is directed to be used for the Region 5 
grazing monitoring cooperative effort.
    Forestland management.--The Committee recommends 
$281,000,000 for forestland management, $10,815,000 above the 
budget request and $4,200,000 below the 1999 funding level. The 
Committee is very concerned about the health of forests on 
National forest system lands and accordingly has provided a 
variety of mechanisms to enhance vegetation management 
activities. The Forest Service allocation of timber sales and 
vegetation management funds should include a mechanism to 
provide substantially more resources to those areas of the 
Nation that are at risk to insect, disease or wildfire loss. 
Selection of priority stands for treatment should consider the 
resulting forest conditions, including the potential for fuels 
reduction, the potential for enhanced habitat values, as well 
as the potential for increased timber growth. The Committee 
directs the Forest Service to reallocate the reforestation 
fund, as authorized, to treat high priority areas that are 
either susceptible to catastrophic fire or are in need of 
thinning or other management to enhance watershed health and 
improve overall forest conditions. The Committee once again 
suggests that the Forest Service should use at least $500,000 
of the vegetation management funds within the challenge cost 
share program so as to maximize the impact of these Federal 
funds. The Committee has included $300,000 to continue the CROP 
program to treat stagnated stands on the Colville National 
Forest and $300,000 for environmental education at the Cradle 
of Forestry, NC. The Committee has not provided funding for the 
newly proposed forest ecosystem restoration and improvement 
activity because there has been an inadequate explanation of 
how and where these funds would be used. The Committee notes 
that the Forest Service can and should use the reforestation 
fund, the road and trails fund, and vegetation management, 
wildlife and fish habitat improvement, hazardous fuels 
reduction, stewardship contracting and watershed improvement 
funding, as directed by the Committee in previous years, for 
the purposes outlined for the newly proposed subactivity. The 
Committee expects the Forest Service to continue to implement 
the stewardship end-result contracting demonstration pilot 
established in fiscal year 1999.
    Timber sales.--The Committee recommends $220,000,000 for 
timber sales, $23,115,000 above the budget request and 
$6,900,000 below the 1999 level. The Committee notes that the 
fuelwood and special forest products programs, as well as 
stewardship timber sales, are cost effective ways of servicing 
public needs and improving forest stand conditions even though 
these programs cause the overall timber sales program to have a 
higher cost than monetary return. The Committee understands 
that these programs are providing substantial public benefits, 
so the Nation is well-served with appropriated funds going for 
these purposes.
    The Committee is aware of the widespread forest health 
problems in the national forests across the country and the 
efforts to complete maps which clearly show these problems. 
Such maps should be used to help prioritize allocations of 
funds so some areas of the nation in greatest need are able to 
use some of the increased funds above the request to tackle the 
forest health problems. In this regard, the Committee 
understands that the agency can use the timber sale program as 
a cost-efficient tool to thin and restructure forest stands. 
Funds within the timber sales management account should be used 
for this purpose, and the agency is encouraged to make every 
effort to include preventive forest health treatments as part 
of timber salvage efforts. The Committee has funded the timber 
sales program to produce the same total sale offer as in fiscal 
year 1999, about 3.6 BBF, consisting of 2.6 BBF of ``green'' 
sales. The remainder of the expected timber sales consists of 
the administration requested level for the salvage sales 
program. The Committee notes that this harvest level is greatly 
reduced from recent times and that local economies can not 
withstand further reductions to this program.
    To ensure that Congress is adequately informed and notified 
of progress or delays in implementing the fiscal year 2000 
program, the Committee requests that the agency continue its 
regular, quarterly reporting of timber sale preparation, offer, 
sale and harvest accomplishments--including a region by region 
status report. The Committee expects the reports to include 
detailed information on the status of the timber sales pipeline 
and an identification of the volumes offered, sold, and 
harvested categorized as net merchantable sawtimber. Timber 
program accomplishments should report timber actually sold and 
transferred to purchasers, and the volume offered. The reports 
are to be as comprehensive as possible and provide information 
on both green and salvage sales. The Committee understands that 
considerable resources are needed to implement the new timber 
information manager computer programs (TIM), but these 
automation improvements will enhance public service and 
management capabilities. The TIM must be made to be fully 
compatible with the agency-wide reporting systems. Any 
additional salvage opportunities that may arise during fiscal 
year 2000 should not impact green sale targets.
    Soil, water and air management.--The Committee recommends 
$60,932,000 for soil, water and air management, $6,165,000 
below the budget request but an increase of $4,835,000 above 
the 1999 funding level. The Committee has provided, within the 
increased funding above the enacted level, $1,000,000 to work 
on rehabilitation of damaged lands, especially those with acid-
mine drainage problems, on the Wayne National Forest. The 
funding level for the CCS program should be maintained at the 
1999 level.
    Minerals and geology management.--The Committee recommends 
$38,300,000 for minerals and geology management, $2,250,000 
above the budget request and $1,250,000 above the 1999 funding 
level. The Committee recommended funding level should cover 
fixed cost increases.
    Land ownership management.--The Committee recommends 
$63,972,000 for land ownership management, equal to the request 
and $2,833,000 above the 1999 funding level. The Committee held 
detailed hearings on fair market charges for various land uses 
and associated management activities by the Forest Service. 
While the Committee understands that funding shortfalls often 
hamper permit administration, the Committee also is concerned 
that these administrative and public service tasks are often 
not given their proper priority with field line managers. As a 
result of the hearings, the Committee has added legislative 
language in Title III, Section 328, to assist the Forest 
Service to recover the costs of permit and land use 
administration. This will provide enhanced public service to 
Federal taxpayers for public resources that are used by private 
entities. The Committee will work closely with the Forest 
Service to see that this new authority is carefully 
implemented. The Committee encourages the Forest Service to 
continue to work closely with the Bureau of Land Management in 
order that these programs are compatible across Federal land 
ownership lines, thereby minimizing bureaucracy and 
inconvenience to the public.
    Infrastructure management.--The Committee has transferred 
the activities previously included in the infrastructure 
management budget line item in order to increase efficiency and 
oversight. The facility maintenance recreation and non-
recreation activities, as well as the trail maintenance 
activity, have been included with reconstruction and 
construction activities in the newly named ``reconstruction and 
maintenance'' appropriation account.
    Law enforcement operations.--The Committee recommends 
$68,288,000 for law enforcement operations, $2,000,000 above 
both the budget request and the 1999 funding level. The 
Committee remains concerned about special law enforcement 
problems on the National forest system associated with drug 
enforcement in Kentucky and directs that funding for these 
programs in Kentucky be maintained at the 1999 level.
    Land Between the Lakes.--The Committee notes that Title V 
of the fiscal year 1999 Interior and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act included legislation, the Land Between the 
Lakes (LBL) Protection Act of 1998, that transfers this 
property to Forest Service management in any fiscal year that 
the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) does not receive an 
appropriation of at least $6,000,000 for LBL management. 
Accordingly, the Committee has included sufficient funds this 
year to provide for management of the LBL by the Forest 
Service. The Committee has included $7,000,000, consisting of 
$5,400,000 of national forest system funds, $1,300,000 in 
reconstruction and maintenance funds, and $300,000 in wildfire 
management funds. Should this land transfer occur in fiscal 
year 2000 as expected, the instructions provided by the 
Congress during fiscal year 1999 should be followed.
    General administration.--The Committee recommends 
$250,000,000 for general administration, $6,400,000 below both 
the budget request and the 1999 funding level. The Committee 
still has huge concerns about the use of administrative funds 
by the Forest Service and the Department of Agriculture. The 
Committee is also concerned that last year's direction 
regarding the funding of administrative functions was not 
implemented by the Forest Service. Rather than take steps at 
this point to alter the current configuration of the general 
administration activity, the Committee has maintained the 
budget structure for now while awaiting the report from the 
National Academy of Public Administration. The Committee 
understands that the fiscal situation of the Forest Service has 
been unacceptable and that considerable work and resources are 
needed to solve past problems. However, the Committee is also 
very concerned that the Forest Service is hiring too many 
permanent staff at headquarters for accounting and related 
activities when the increased work-load at headquarters 
resulting from implementing the new system will not be 
permanent. The Committee directs the Forest Service and the 
department to provide a detailed report within 30 days of 
enactment that clearly shows all fiscal, budget and related 
business functions of both institutions, how these services are 
specifically interrelated, and that indicates the funding 
sources and costs for all staff and contractors involved in 
these activities. The Committee is also concerned that 
insufficient provisions have been made by the Forest Service to 
test new financial management computer systems before 
implementing them, and that inadequate back-up systems are in 
place should the new agency-wide fiscal system not perform. The 
Committee expects to receive regular updates during fiscal year 
2000 as the new fiscal systems are being implemented.
    The Committee has included bill language requiring the 
display of unobligated balances available at the end of the 
fiscal year, by expanded budget line item and by region, in 
order to display better to the Congress and the public previous 
expenditures. The Committee is prepared to reinstitute one-year 
funding for the Forest Service if the administration continues 
to try to fund various initiatives that have not been presented 
in budget justifications with prior year carry-over funds.
    The Committee is also concerned that too much scarce 
funding is being used for public affairs and headquarters 
office of communications efforts when on-the-ground needs are 
so great. The Committee directs the Forest Service to provide 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations with a 
detailed report within 60 days of enactment that indicates the 
public affairs and communications workload, staffing, and 
funding sources at all levels of the agency. The Committee 
expects an especially detailed explanation of headquarters 
operations and expected accomplishments, as well as performance 
measures that the public can understand.
    General.--The Committee remains concerned about 
accountability for funds. As discussed in last year's Committee 
report, the Forest Service is to maintain all specific 
Congressional designations, in any amount, or to submit a 
reprogramming request if any such designation is proposed for a 
change. The Committee is also concerned about ``National 
commitments'' and ``Washington Office external'' charges. These 
items should be clearly displayed and explained in the budget 
justification and efforts should be made to reduce these 
expenses. The Committee directs that no funds be used for the 
natural resource agenda or conservation education national 
commitment categories until a detailed, agency-wide spending 
plan, including funding sources and expected results, is 
approved by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 
Neither of these activities has been explained in the budget 
justification. The national commitment category is useful for 
short-term funding of multi-program efforts, but it should not 
be used for on-going efforts such as those mentioned above. 
Such efforts should, if they are needed year after year, be 
included in the budget justification as normal programs. The 
Committee is also concerned that the Forest Service has many 
stray conservation education efforts that do not provide a 
coherent effort. The report to the Committees explaining 
conservation education should clearly indicate the legal 
authorities for these efforts and also explain in detail how 
these efforts by the Forest Service relate to, and are 
integrated with, efforts by other Federal agencies, the States, 
and other citizen and institutional groups. The Committee notes 
that the budget request lists $303,000 for the American 
Heritage Rivers effort as a national commitment. The Committee 
directs that no more than $200,000 be allocated to the American 
Heritage Rivers efforts of the Forest Service and that the 3 
local communities having Forest Service river navigators be 
asked to make-up the short-fall with cost sharing; no funds may 
be transferred to or used to support the Council for 
Environmental Quality or other Federal agencies or institutions 
for these purposes; and no funds may be used at headquarters or 
departmental offices. Bill language is included in Title III, 
Section 326, to assure this direction.
    The Committee directs that the Department of Agriculture 
``Greenbook'' charges for working capital fund and central cost 
distribution be displayed in future budget justifications. In 
order to understand more fully these charges and provide 
additional Congressional oversight, the Committee has included 
bill language preventing transfer of Forest Service funds to 
the department working capital fund until the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations have approved a spending plan.
    The Committee commends the Forest Service efforts to 
leverage its funds with non-Federal partners through its 
challenge cost share (CCS) program. The Committee expects that 
the Forest Service will comply with the suggested CCS funding 
levels in the budget justification special exhibit unless 
otherwise noted in this report, and that the direction provided 
by the Committee in fiscal year 1999 will again be followed.
    Administrative provisions.--The Committee has discontinued 
language that is no longer needed limiting clearcutting in the 
Wayne NF, OH and leasing on the Shawnee NF, IL and continued 
language regarding ``Jobs in the Woods'' grants in the State of 
Washington. The Committee understands that no clearcutting will 
occur on these two forests and that clearcutting is rarely used 
elsewhere except to accomplish specific habitat objectives. The 
Committee has retained language concerning fund-raising for the 
Grey Towers National Historic Landmark and the Pinchot 
Institute for Conservation. The Committee is encouraged by 
activities of the Pinchot Institute to raise funds to help 
restore this important facility and notes that future Federal 
funding to complete this project is dependent on a healthy 
partnership with the Pinchot Institute and other institutions. 
The Committee has also retained language requiring 
reimbursement for salary and expenses for employees on details 
exceeding 30 days.
    The Committee has reinstituted language requiring advance 
submission and approval of proposals to change regional 
boundaries, close or move a regional headquarters office, or to 
implement any reorganization. The Committee is especially 
concerned with headquarters expansions that involve hiring 
numerous support personnel for agency administrative 
executives.
    The Committee has included bill language to allow any funds 
available to the Secretary of Agriculture to be transferred to 
the wildland fire appropriation for forest firefighting and 
related activities, but this authority may be used only when 
previously appropriated emergency contingent wildland fire 
funds have been released by the President and apportioned. 
Unfortunately, during recent years the administration has found 
it easier to take funds from Forest Service accounts than to 
release funds appropriated especially for these wildland 
firefighting emergency needs.
    The Committee has included language allowing the Forest 
Service to reimburse the USDA Office of the General Council for 
certain expenses up to $500,000.
    The Committee includes language allowing the Forest Service 
to transfer up to $1,000,000 of available funds to the National 
Forest Foundation and transfers $2,650,000, the same as during 
1999, to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. These funds 
are to be used for matching funds as authorized, thereby 
leveraging additional private funding and furthering the 
multiple use and public service mission of the Forest Service. 
The Committee remains interested in the mission of the National 
Forest Foundation (NFF) yet has been discouraged with previous 
leadership and management of the foundation but is encouraged 
by its new leadership. The Committee has continued authority to 
transfer funds to the NFF for both matching purposes and up to 
$200,000 for administrative purposes. The Committee encourages 
the Department of Agriculture, the Forest Service and the NFF 
to work closely together to reestablish the NFF. The Committee 
hopes that by the beginning of fiscal year 2000 the NFF can 
once again be implementing its authorized mission.
    Forest Service trust fund accountability and performance.--
The Committee recommends a comprehensive approach to guarantee 
accountability and efficiency for the Forest Service Knutson-
Vandenberg reforestation trust fund (KV fund), the salvage sale 
fund and the brush disposal fund. As a result of several 
hearings by the Agriculture authorizing committee and program 
examination by this Committee and the General Accounting Office 
(GAO), it has become apparent that the Forest Service has 
inadequately managed these funds and that there is a need to 
provide additional Congressional scrutiny with respect to the 
collection and use of these funds. The Committee notes that 
there is widespread agreement that the reforestation, watershed 
improvement and wildlife habitat restoration work supported by 
the KV fund are all vital to the management of the national 
forest system. The Committee expects the Forest Service 
leadership to do a better job of assuring the American public 
and the Congress that field managers do not have ``slush 
funds'' and that funds collected for trust fund activities are 
used appropriately. The Committee also notes that timber sale 
scheduling and implementation is dependent upon the level of 
appropriations. Field managers must adhere to the sale schedule 
that is made possible by the appropriated funds and, where 
necessary, salvage diseased or dying forests.
    The Committee, after consulting with the Agriculture and 
Resources Committees, recommends the following reforms:
    1. In order to reduce overhead and ensure that funds are 
used for program goals and not for excessive administrative 
costs, the Committee has previously limited the use of indirect 
funds from the KV fund, and the salvage sale and brush disposal 
funds to 20% of expenditures. The Committee is working to 
control and reduce administrative costs. The Committee 
recognizes that there is a legitimate need to administer the 
activities supported by the funds and that the funds should 
provide for these administrative costs.
    2. Funds appropriated for general administration of the 
national forest system shall not be used to supplement 
administration of the KV, salvage sale or brush disposal funds.
    3. The Forest Service is directed to submit a detailed plan 
of operations regarding these three funds to the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations, the House Agriculture and 
Resources Committees and the Senate Energy and Natural 
Resources Committee within 90 days of enactment. The Committee 
requires that this plan provide sufficient detail to explain 
and justify the program of work and expected accomplishments at 
each national forest unit using KV funds.
    4. In order to increase efficiency and provide incentives 
to hold costs down, the Committee requires that the plan of 
work include understandable measurements, that monitoring of KV 
activities be an essential component of implementation, and 
that projected and actual unit costs are clearly depicted. The 
Committee expects that the performance measures will allow 
close monitoring of unit costs so as to increase cost-
efficiency.
    5. The Committee stresses that the work funded by the KV 
fund shall only include those activities that are authorized by 
law, such as reforestation, and improving the future 
productivity of the renewable resources in the timber sale 
area. This allows work on watershed improvements and fish, 
wildlife, and plant habitat improvements as well as maintenance 
and construction related to authorized activities.
    6. The Committee is concerned that in recent years the 
Forest Service has over-used these funds for a variety of 
overhead activities and to pursue various initiatives that do 
not directly relate to the habitat and forest improvement 
activities authorized for the KV fund. Therefore, the Committee 
expects that the Forest Service will not use the three trust 
funds at the regional or Washington office level except for 
activities strictly related to program management and 
oversight, fiscal management, and policy development that 
relates directly to implementing activities authorized by these 
funds.
    7. These trust funds shall not be used for Department of 
Agriculture general assessments nor for general assessments or 
national commitments within the Forest Service.
    8. The Committee notes that the Forest Service has been 
unable to provide comprehensive answers to Congressional or GAO 
questions on the national scope and performance of these trust 
funds. Therefore, the Committee requires that the Forest 
Service develop and implement, by the end of fiscal year 2000, 
an automated process for KV fund management, including all 
phases of KV fund activities from planning to project 
implementation and project monitoring.
    9. The Committee shares public concern that the program of 
work for the KV fund, the brush disposal fund, and the salvage 
sale fund needs to have greater public transparency and 
accountability. Accordingly, the Committee expects that the 
Forest Service will provide in all future budget justifications 
a detailed display of the anticipated program of work for these 
funds in the upcoming year. This display should also provide a 
clearly understandable presentation of how the forest and 
habitat improvement activities supported by these funds relate 
to activities funded with discretionary appropriations. This 
display should indicate the relative priorities of the various 
work and present an integrated approach to forest management.

                        Wildland fire management




Appropriation enacted, 1999 (excluding emergency).....      $560,176,000
Contingent emergency enacted, 1999....................       102,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000 (excluding emergency)...........       560,730,000
Budget estimate, 2000 contingent emergency............        90,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       561,354,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation (excluding emergency), 1999.........        +1,178,000
    Budget estimate, 2000 (excluding emergency).......          +624,000


    The Committee recommends $561,354,000 for wildland fire 
management, $624,000 above the budget request and $1,178,000 
above the 1999 funding level. The Committee has not included 
the requested emergency contingent funds for fire operations 
but notes, once again, that the previously appropriated 
$250,000,000 in fire emergency funds are still available and 
are readily available for wildfire suppression operations. The 
Committee has included bill language which transfers half of 
the remaining unobligated funds at the end of fiscal year 1999, 
excepting hazardous fuels funding, from this account to pay 
back previously advanced sums. The Committee has also included 
$300,000 for Land Between the Lakes NRA wildfire and fuels 
management.
    The Committee recommendation includes $360,200,000 for 
preparedness and fire use, $35,324,000 above both the budget 
request and the 1999 funding levels. The Committee has 
recommended a substantial increase over the request for 
wildfire preparedness because it is vital to save lives, 
property, and natural resources. The Committee recognizes that 
this is just 75% of the most efficient level (MEL), as 
determined by Forest Service models, and that additional 
funding in this activity, were it available, would provide much 
more than a dollar for dollar savings in subsequent wildfire 
suppression operations and loss of valuable resources. The 
Committee recommends $200,854,000 for fire operations, 
$35,000,000 below the request and $34,446,000 below the 1999 
level. The Committee directs that about $70,000,000 be reserved 
for hazardous fuels operations and that the $5,000,000 increase 
from the enacted be used in those parts of the NFS that have 
particularly severe forest health and wildfire risks. The 
Committee notes that there is $250,000,000 in previously 
appropriated wildfire funding available for emergency use and 
that the Secretary has transfer authority to use other funds 
during emergencies once these previously appropriated emergency 
contingent funds are released and apportioned. The Committee 
directs the Forest Service to provide to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations within 120 days of enactment a 
description of the hazardous fuels situation on NFS lands, the 
priorities, by national forest for their treatment, the means 
for integrating this work with other forest and habitat 
management goals and collaboration with the Department of the 
Interior, performance measures and anticipated accomplishments.
    The Committee notes that the Forest Service has reported 
that at least 40,000,000 acres are in danger of catastrophic 
fire and that much of this area is in the wildland-urban 
interface area where there are substantial life, health, 
property and environmental concerns. The Committee encourages 
use of fuels reduction funds in the wildland-urban interface 
and expects that mechanical treatments will frequently be 
employed, including the capture of commercial value of trees 
thinned for fuels reduction and forestry purposes. The 
Committee is encouraged by increased integration of the fuels 
program into National forest system management, but there still 
is a need to incorporate fuels work into a larger vision of 
habitat and forest desired future conditions. The hazardous 
fuels program should be thoroughly integrated with related 
programs, such as forest vegetation management, habitat and 
watershed improvement funds, the reforestation fund, and the 
road and trail fund, to maximize multiple benefits to society 
by reducing fire danger, improving watershed and habitat 
conditions, and increasing forest health. The Committee expects 
the Forest Service to do a more thorough job in its future 
budget justifications at explaining the wildfire program and 
how it relates to overall forest and rangeland management and 
how its program goals and accomplishments can be integrated 
into the overall agency mission and its performance measured.
    The Committee has included funding at the 1999 level for 
the Joint Fire Science Program in both the Forest Service and 
the Department of the Interior and looks forward to receiving 
progress reports from the Governing Board and program managers. 
The Committee has included bill language allowing this program 
to use grant authorities available to the research branch.
    The Committee urges the two Departments to continue to work 
closely together to develop common budget and program 
management approaches to wildland fire management. In 
particular, the Committee expects that future budget 
justifications and requests for both preparedness and 
operations will reflect common assumptions and budget 
strategies (such as percent of MEL and percent of ten-year 
average) for the two Departments.

                     reconstruction and maintenance




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $302,963,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       295,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       396,602,000
Comparison:
  Appropriation, 1999.................................       +93,639,000
  Budget estimate, 2000...............................      +101,602,000


    The Committee recommends $396,602,000 for reconstruction 
and maintenance, a new account. This new account is created by 
transferring facility and trail maintenance from the 
infrastructure maintenance activity within the national forest 
system account and joining it with the former reconstruction 
and construction account. The recommended funding level is an 
increase of $101,602,000 above the budget request for the 
proposed new account, ``public asset protection and 
management'' and an increase of $93,639,000 above the 1999 
funding level for the reconstruction and construction 
appropriation account. The Committee notes that there was a 
disconnect between the funding level in the Forest Service 
budget request and that provided by the OMB in the official 
President's budget appendix. Since an official budget 
correction was never presented to the Committee, an adjustment 
is included in the detail table below. The Committee has also 
included $1,300,000 for Land Between the Lakes NRA facilities, 
road and trail maintenance.
    The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
funds:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Committee
                                                            1999 enacted       2000 request      recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Reconstruction and construction
Research:
    Admin request projects.............................          5,010,000          7,510,000          7,500,000
    Other..............................................          7,000,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal: Research...............................         12,010,000          7,510,000          7,500,000
                                                        ========================================================
Fire, admin, other:
    Marienville RS consolidation PA....................  .................  .................          1,140,000
    Other..............................................          5,247,000  .................  .................
    Other admin request projects.......................         19,699,000         22,946,000         22,946,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal: FAO....................................         24,946,000         22,946,000         24,086,000
                                                        ========================================================
Recreation:
    Allegheny NF rec facilities PA.....................  .................  .................            400,000
    Angeles NF toilet and water system rehab CA........  .................  .................          1,200,000
    Badin Lake cmpgrd NC...............................          1,000,000  .................            400,000
    Boone NF Rockcastle boat ramp KY...................  .................  .................            375,000
    Cradle of Forestry NC..............................            559,000  .................          1,078,000
    Ocoee boater put-in & Thunder Rock cmpgd TN........  .................  .................            600,000
    San Bernardino NF Dogwood cmpg CA..................  .................  .................          1,200,000
    Santa Inez First Crossing CA.......................  .................  .................            950,000
    Waldo Lake sanitation OR...........................  .................  .................            800,000
    Other..............................................         10,670,000  .................  .................
    Projects subtotal..................................  .................  .................          7,003,000
    Other admin request................................         20,720,000         32,949,000         32,949,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal: Recreation reconstruction..............         32,949,000         32,949,000         39,952,000
                                                        ========================================================
      Subtotal facilities reconstruction...............         69,905,000         63,405,000         71,538,000
                                                        ========================================================
         Trail reconstruction and construction
Continental Divide trail (various).....................            500,000             75,000            500,000
Florida National Scenic Trail..........................            250,000  .................            250,000
Ocoee river trail system TN............................  .................  .................            300,000
VA Creeper trail repair VA.............................  .................  .................            500,000
Other Admin. request projects..........................         13,200,000         12,979,000         12,979,000
Other trail reconstruction.............................         15,304,000                  0         14,173,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal trails construction:....................         29,554,000         13,054,000         28,702,000
                                                        ========================================================
          Road reconstruction and construction
Admin. Request projects................................         97,509,000         96,468,000         99,909,000
Other..................................................            500,000  .................  .................
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal Road reconstruction.....................         98,009,000         96,468,000         99,909,000
                                                        ========================================================
Emergency appropriation PL 106-31......................          5,611,000  .................  .................
                                                        ========================================================
      Subtotal Reconstruction and construction.........        203,079,000        172,927,000        200,149,000
                                                        ========================================================
                      Maintenance
Facilities.............................................       (52,224,000)         55,224,000         55,224,000
Road Maint. & decommissioning..........................         99,884,000        122,484,000        119,484,000
Trails.................................................       (18,445,000)         20,445,000         20,445,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Maintenance subtotal.............................         99,884,000        198,153,000        195,153,000
                                                        ========================================================
Land between lakes, maintenance, repairs...............                  0                  0          1,300,000
Adjustment to President's budget.......................  .................        -76,080,000  .................
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total............................................        302,963,000        295,000,000        396,602,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    Reconstruction and Construction

    Facilities construction and reconstruction.--The Committee 
recommends $71,538,000 for facilities construction and 
reconstruction, $8,133,000 above the budget request and 
$1,633,000 above the 1999 funding level. The challenge cost 
share funding levels should follow the budget justification. 
The Committee notes that there is a huge backlog in deferred 
maintenance and repairs for Forest Service facilities, roads 
and trails. Solving this problem will take time, effort, 
resources and many partnerships. The Forest Service should 
continue its efforts to document backlogs and display this 
information in the budget justification. The Committee has 
provided full funding for the projects in the budget request 
and notes that virtually all of the funds provided herein are 
for reconstruction, repair or replacement of deteriorated 
facilities. No funds are included for the Region 9 relocation. 
The Committee also encourages the Forest Service to evaluate 
carefully its facility needs and strive to dispose of unneeded 
facilities.
    Research.--The Committee recommends $7,500,000, $10,000 
below the budget request and $4,510,000 below the 1999 level 
for research facility construction.
    Fire, administrative, other (FAO).--The Committee 
recommends $24,886,000 for FAO facilities construction and 
reconstruction, $1,940,000 above the budget request and $60,000 
below the 1999 level. The Committee expects that the 
Marienville ranger station consolidation, when completed, will 
result in long-term cost savings in facilities and staffing for 
the joined ranger districts.
    Recreation facilities.--The Committee recommends 
$39,952,000 for recreation facilities construction and 
reconstruction, $7,003,000 above both the budget request and 
the 1999 enacted level.
    Trail reconstruction and construction.--The Committee 
recommends $28,702,000 for trail reconstruction, $852,000 below 
the 1999 level but an increase of $15,648,000 above the budget 
request. The Committee does not concur with the Administration 
request to use the road and trails fund to replace basic trail 
needs. The Committee notes that the Forest Service is using 
those funds to great advantage to reduce some of the vast 
backlog in deferred maintenance and repairs. These projects 
prevent adverse environmental or health consequences, and their 
funding should not be slashed, as requested by the 
administration, in order to provide for basic trail 
reconstruction. Challenge cost share funding should adhere to 
the budget justification.
    Road reconstruction and construction.--The Committee 
recommends $99,909,000 for road reconstruction and 
construction, $3,441,000 above the request and $1,900,000 above 
the 1999 level. As provided in fiscal year 1999, the timber 
purchaser road credit program is eliminated. The Committee 
recommendation includes no appropriated funds to improve or 
construct timber access roads. Timber purchasers will 
reconstruct access roads if needed; funds recommended by the 
Committee provide needed design and National Environmental 
Policy Act mandated environmental review, public involvement 
and disclosure. Nation-wide, as requested by the 
Administration, only 6.2 miles of new roads will be 
constructed. The increase above the request includes $1,350,000 
for reconstruction of the Tunnel Ridge road and construction of 
the Nose Dock boat ramp on the Boone NF, KY.

                              Maintenance

    The Committee recommends $195,153,000 for maintenance, 
$3,000,000 below the request for these activities and 
$24,600,000 above the 1999 funding level for these same 
activities. The Committee has provided the requested funding 
level for facilities maintenance, $55,224,000. The 
recommendation for road maintenance is $3,000,000 below the 
request but it is $19,600,000 above the 1999 funding level. The 
Committee understands the great needs for maintaining the vast 
road system and so has given this activity a large increase. 
The Committee recommends $20,445,000 for trail maintenance, the 
same as the budget request and $2,000,000 above the 1999 
funding level. The Committee expects to continue to receive 
regular reports and briefings on progress attacking the huge 
backlog of deferred maintenance and repair, especially as it 
relates to the activities funded through the road and trails 
fund. The Committee is pleased with the work accomplished 
during the past year with these funds.
    The Committee is concerned that road decommissioning and 
closures should not be pursued aggressively until the new road 
policy is fully understood and implemented. However, for the 
entire NFS road decommissioning will exceed greatly the extent 
of new road construction. The Committee has continued bill 
language allowing up to $15,000,000 to be used for road 
decommissioning. The Committee recommends that transportation 
planning be done at the local National forest level and be 
closely coordinated with the forest planning process so that 
decisions affecting rural America are made with the best data 
in hand and with full knowledge of local impacts to communities 
and the environment. The Committee has provided substantial 
resources to manage the road system, recognizing how important 
this is for Americans to access and enjoy their National 
forests and grasslands.

                            land acquisition




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $117,918,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       118,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         1,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................      -116,918,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................      -117,000,000


    The Committee recommends a total of $41,000,000 for land 
acquisition. This amount includes $1,000,000 in newly 
appropriated funds and the use of $40,000,000 in fiscal year 
1999 funding, which had been provided for the Baca Ranch, NM. 
These funds have been redirected because the landowners 
withdrew their offer to sell. The amount recommended by the 
Committee is a decrease of $116,918,000 below the enacted level 
and $117,000,000 below the fiscal year 2000 budget request. The 
Committee recommends the following distribution of funds:
                                                               Committee
        Area and State                                    recommendation
Angeles NF (Pacific Crest Trail) (CA)...................      $1,500,000
Bar T Bar Ranch (Coconino NF) (AZ)......................       3,000,000
Big Sur (Los Padres NF) (CA)............................       4,000,000
Chattooga WSR (GA/SC/NC)................................       1,000,000
Coconino NF (Sedona Rock) (AZ)..........................       3,500,000
Daniel Boone NF (KY)....................................       2,500,000
Flathead NF (Lindberg Lake) (MT)........................       2,000,000
Hoosier NF (IN).........................................       1,000,000
Mark Twain NF (MO)......................................       1,000,000
Pacific NW Streams (Bowe Ranch) (WA)....................       2,000,000
San Bernardino NF (CA)..................................       2,500,000
Santa Fe NF (Jemez River) (NM)..........................       1,000,000
Sawtooth NF (ID)........................................       2,000,000
Wayne NF (OH)...........................................       1,000,000
White Mountains NF (Lake Umbagog) (NH)..................       1,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal..........................................      29,000,000
Emergency inholdings....................................       1,500,000
Wilderness inholdings...................................         500,000
Cash Equalization.......................................       1,500,000
Acquisition Management..................................       8,500,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................      41,000,000

    The Committee considers the Pacific Crest National Scenic 
Trail, which extends from California through Oregon and 
Washington States, to be a high priority and has included funds 
to initiate emergency land purchases near the Angeles National 
Forest. The Committee recognizes that many existing narrow 
easements, often less than 20 feet wide, coupled with 
encroaching development, offer inadequate protection for many 
sections of the trail. In addition, in certain locations there 
are relocations that could provide a much more scenic route and 
a significantly higher quality hiking experience for trail 
users.
    The Committee understands that approximately 300 miles of 
the 2,650 mile trail may be inadequately protected or located. 
Although the Committee has provided funds this year to begin 
protection of the most endangered portions, the Committee is 
deeply concerned that the Federal agencies have done very 
little planning and detail work, including the preparation of 
segment maps. It should be clearly understood that the 
completion of this work will be critical to any significant 
future appropriations.
    In addition, the Committee strongly encourages the Pacific 
Crest Trail Association to help raise significant non-Federal 
matching funds to ensure that the most critical sections which 
are threatened by development can be protected. A strong 
public/private partnership on the Pacific Crest Trail will have 
an impact on the future level of Federal support.
    Therefore, the Committee directs the Secretary of 
Agriculture, who has overall responsibility for administration 
of this trail, to work in close consultation with the Secretary 
of the Interior and the Pacific Crest Trail Association to 
identify, assess and prioritize the needs of the trail 
including the preparation of segment maps as was done with the 
Appalachian National Scenic Trail. The Forest Service should 
report to the Committee no later than March 1, 2000 on their 
plans for accomplishing this work.
    The Committee has included bill language making permanent 
the existing mineral withdrawal within the New World Mining 
District, MT.

        acquisition of lands for National forests, special acts




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $1,069,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         1,069,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         1,069,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $1,069,000 for acquisition of 
lands for National forests, special acts, the same as the 
budget request and the same as in 1999. 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 land exchanges




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................          $210,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................           210,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................           210,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $210,000 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 Forest lands 
conveyed in the exchanges.

                         range betterment fund




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $3,300,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         3,300,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         3,300,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $3,300,000, the budget request, 
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, 1999...........................           $92,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................            92,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................            92,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 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.

                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


                         Clean Coal Technology

    The Committee has agreed to defer $190,000,000 in 
previously appropriated Clean Coal Technology budget authority 
until fiscal year 2001 instead of a $256 million deferral over 
three years as proposed by the Administration. To the extent 
funds are not needed because of premature project terminations, 
the Committee will continue its practice of rescinding excess 
funds. The Committee believes more substantial deferrals or 
rescissions are not warranted at this time.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. Up to $14 million may be used for administration of the 
clean coal technology program in fiscal year 2000.
    2. The Committee does not object to the continued support 
of the U.S./China Energy and Environmental Center, which 
promotes the use of American energy technology that will 
greatly reduce emissions and improve energy efficiency.

                 fossil energy research and development

    The fossil energy programs of the Department of Energy make 
prudent investments in long-range research and development that 
help protect the environment through higher efficiency power 
generation, advanced production technologies and improved 
compliance and stewardship operations. These activities 
safeguard our domestic energy security. This country will 
continue to rely on fossil fuels for the majority of its energy 
requirements for the foreseeable future, and the activities 
funded through the fossil energy research and development 
account ensure that fossil energy technologies continue to 
improve with respect to emissions reduction 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. Programs funded under this account are working 
toward 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, 1999...........................      $384,056,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       340,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       335,292,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       -48,764,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -4,708,000


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


    The Committee recommends $335,292,000 for fossil energy 
research and development, a decrease of $4,708,000 below the 
budget request and $48,764,000 below the fiscal year 1999 
level.
    Coal.--The Committee recommends $124,482,000 for coal 
research, an increase of $2,050,000 above the budget request. 
Changes to the budget request include a decrease of $4,950,000 
in advanced clean efficient power systems and an increase of 
$7,000,000 for a steelmaking feedstock program. The decrease 
referenced above represents the transfer of funds from the high 
efficiency integrated gasified combined cycle program for fuel 
cells to the fuel cell program.
    Natural Gas.--The Committee recommends $27,457,000 for 
natural gas research, a decrease of $40,208,000 below the 
budget request. Changes to the budget request include a 
decrease of $41,808,000 for advanced turbine systems, of which 
$800,000 is for the midsize turbines program under Vision 21 
and $41,008,000 is transferred to the energy conservation 
account to consolidate turbine program funding in that account, 
and increases of $1,000,000 in exploration and production/
advanced drilling, completion and simulation for a laser 
drilling program and $600,000 in effective environmental 
protection/outreach and technology transfer for National 
laboratory partnerships.
    Fuel Cells.--The Committee recommends $44,599,000 for fuel 
cell research, an increase of $6,950,000 above the budget 
request. Changes to the budget request include increases of 
$4,950,000 for fuel cells development which is transferred from 
advanced clean efficient power systems in the coal area and 
$2,000,000 to continue the multilayer ceramic technology 
program.
    Oil Technology.--The Committee recommends $54,666,000 for 
oil technology research, an increase of $4,500,000 above the 
budget request for recovery field demonstrations to expand the 
preferred petroleum upstream management practices program.
    Gasification.--The Committee recommends $9,000,000 for a 
black liquor gasification program which the Administration 
proposed to fund in the Energy Conservation account. The 
Committee believes strongly that the fossil energy program and, 
in particular, the Federal Energy Technology Center, has the 
expertise to oversee this program as it has been responsible 
for gasification efforts in the past. The industries of the 
future program in Energy Conservation should provide assistance 
as necessary to fossil energy.
    Cooperative Research and Development.--The Committee 
recommends $6,836,000, an increase of $1,000,000 above the 
budget request, for cooperative research and development. The 
recommended funding is equivalent to the 1999 level.
    Environmental Restoration.--The Committee recommends 
$10,000,000, equal to the budget request, for environmental 
restoration.
    Fuels Program.--The Committee recommends $2,173,000, the 
budget request, for the fuels conversion, natural gas and 
electricity program.
    Headquarters Program Direction.--The Committee recommends 
$16,016,000, the budget request, for headquarters program 
direction.
    Energy Technology Center Program Direction.--The Committee 
recommends $57,063,000 for energy technology center program 
direction, an increase of $1,000,000 above the budget request. 
The increase is for contract services.
    General Plant Projects.--The Committee recommends 
$2,000,000, the budget request for general plant projects.
    Mining.--The Committee recommends $5,000,000, the budget 
request, for the mining/advanced metallurgical processes 
program.
    Other.--The Committee has not agreed to the use of 
$11,000,000 in prior year funds to offset fossil requirements 
in fiscal year 2000 but has agreed to the use of $24,000,000 in 
funds from the Biomass Energy Development account as a partial 
offset to fossil energy research and development funding. The 
Committee does not object to the use of up to $1,500,000 in 
prior year funds to complete the direct liquefaction program 
with Hydrocarbon Technologies Inc.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Committee expects the Department to focus its Vision 
21 activities on critical electric power generation 
technologies, including integrated gasification combined cycle, 
pressurized fluidized bed combustion and fuel cells based on 
syngas.
    2. The Department, in coordination with the fossil energy 
and energy conservation programs, should report to the 
Committee by December 15, 1999 on advanced materials work, 
including high temperature steel alloys and ceramics for large-
scale power applications. The report should include a 
description of each project, year-by-year funding levels for 
each project and intended applications of each technology.
    3. The Department should work closely with industry to 
ensure that technology research and development is consistent 
with industry roadmapping efforts such as those of the Electric 
Power Research Institute and the Coal Utilization Research 
Council.
    4. The increase of $2,000,000 in the fuel cell program for 
multilayer ceramic technology is to continue work with 
McDermott Technology, Inc. on the development of this 
technology; provided the company provides matching funds.
    5. The Committee expects the Department to address the 
House Science Committee's recommendations in preparing the 
fiscal year 2001 budget request for Fossil Energy Research and 
Development.
    6. The turbine program funding is consolidated in Energy 
Conservation, but Fossil Energy should continue to manage its 
portions of the program.
    7. The Committee encourages continued coordination with 
States and industry to ensure research is meaningful and not 
duplicative.
    8. The funding provided for a steelmaking feedstock program 
is contingent on at least a dollar-for-dollar cost share with 
industry partners.
    9. Funding is provided in the energy conservation account 
for a reciprocating engines research program. The Committee 
expects the fossil energy program to coordinate closely with 
the industries of the future program on reciprocating engine 
research. The Committee does not object to this research being 
conducted under the fossil energy account if that proves to be 
more appropriate.
    10. The Committee is aware of a proposed demonstration 
project by Public Service Electric & Gas, based in Newark, New 
Jersey, that involves mercury emissions control technology for 
coal fired power plants and encourages the Department to 
examine this proposal and report to the Committee on what is 
involved, cost estimates and recommendations for pursuing this 
effort.
    11. The Committee continues to support the Department's 
efforts to develop and implement a multi-agency and public and 
private sector research and development partnership initiative 
for methane hydrates. This effort should continue to be 
coordinated by DOE and involve the Department of Interior's 
Geological Survey, the Minerals Management Service (MMS), the 
Department of Defense's Naval Research Laboratory, and the 
applied expertise of multiple universities in partnership with 
industry. The Gulf of Mexico Hydrate Research Consortium 
program, managed by the Center for Marine Resources and 
Environmental Technology, is an applied academic research arm 
of the MMS which has already begun to develop such a multi-
agency public/private partnership initiative for methane 
hydrates. The Committee encourages the Department to consider 
using the consortium's expertise in this area.
    12. The funding provided for PM 2.5 monitoring and research 
is for data monitoring and development of cost effective 
control technologies or source production science. Also, the 
Committee encourages the Department to continue its monitoring 
efforts in the Southeast.
    13. The Committee understands that the Department's review 
of the use of ramjet technology from the aerospace industry for 
electric power generation has yielded some promising 
possibilities. The Committee asks that the Department provide a 
cost analysis for such a project by October 31, 1999 and 
incorporate it in its budget priorities for fiscal year 2001.

                      alternative fuels production

                     (including transfer of funds)




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       -$1,300,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        -1,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        -1,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          +300,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends the deposit of investment income 
earned as of October 1, 1999, on principal amounts in a trust 
fund established as part of the sale of the Great Plains 
Gasification Plant in Beulah, ND, into this account and 
immediate transfer of the funds to the General Fund of the 
Treasury. The amount available as of October 1, 1999, is 
estimated to be $1,000,000.

                 naval petroleum and oil shale reserves




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $14,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................                 0
Recommended, 2000.....................................                 0
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       -14,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends no new funding for the operation 
of the naval petroleum and oil shale reserves and agrees with 
the Administration's proposal to fund this program through the 
use of available prior year funds.

                      elk hills school lands fund




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $36,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        36,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        36,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $36,000,000 for the Elk Hills 
school lands fund, which is equal to both the budget request 
and the 1999 level. This represents the second of seven 
payments to the fund, which was established as a part of the 
sale of the Elk Hills Naval Petroleum Reserve in California, in 
order to settle school lands claims by the State.

                          energy conservation

    The energy conservation program of the Department of Energy 
funds cooperative research and development projects aimed at 
sustaining economic growth through more efficient energy use. 
Activities financed through this program focus on markedly 
improving existing technologies as well as developing new 
technologies, which ultimately will displace some of our 
reliance on traditional fossil fuels.




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $691,701,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       812,515,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       693,822,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +2,121,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................      -118,693,000


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


    The Committee recommends $693,822,000 for energy 
conservation, a decrease of $118,693,000 below the budget 
request and an increase of $2,121,000 above the fiscal year 
1999 level. Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
    Buildings.--The Committee recommends $250,480,000 for the 
building technology State and community sector program, a 
decrease of $85,401,000 below the budget request. Changes to 
the budget request are shown in the following table:

Buildings/Research and Standards:
    Technology roadmaps & competitive R&D; (1999 level)..      -1,115,000
    Residential building integration:
        Terminate home energy rating systems............      -1,535,000
        Building America (increase above 1999)..........      +2,000,000
        1999 level for other programs...................      -3,956,000
    Commercial building integration (1999 level)........      -3,781,000
    Equipment, materials and tools:
        Lighting and appliance standards (increase above 
          1999).........................................      +2,000,000
        1999 level for other programs...................     -17,786,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal, Buildings Research and Standards....     -24,173,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Building Technology Assistance:
    Weatherization assistance program...................     -34,000,000
    State energy program (1999 level)...................      -4,000,000
    Community partnerships:
        Terminate municipal energy management...........      -1,566,000
        1999 level for other programs...................     -16,599,000
    Energy star program (1999 level)....................      -3,276,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal, Building Technology Assistance..........     -59,441,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Management and Planning:
    Evaluation, planning & analysis.....................      -1,787,000

    Federal Energy Management Program.--The Committee 
recommends $23,918,000 for the Federal energy management 
program, a decrease of $7,950,000 below the budget request and 
an increase for program direction of $100,000 for Regional 
Support Offices above the fiscal year 1999 level. Changes to 
the budget request are shown in the following table:

Program Activities......................................      -7,250,000
Program Direction.......................................        -700,000

    Industry.--The Committee recommends $193,508,000 for 
industry sector programs, an increase of $22,508,000 above the 
budget request. Changes to the budget request are shown in the 
following table:

Industries of the Future (Specific):
    Black liquor gasification (transfer to fossil 
      energy)...........................................      -9,000,000
Industries of the Future (Crosscutting):
    Industrial power generation (turbines)..............      -7,000,000
    Technical assistance/integrated delivery............      -2,000,000
    Utility turbines (transfer from fossil energy)......     +41,008,000
Management & Planning:
    Evaluation and planning.............................        -500,000

    Transportation.--The Committee recommends $208,450,000 for 
transportation research, a decrease of $43,650,000 below the 
budget request. Changes to the budget request are shown in the 
following table:

Vehicle Technology:
    Hybrid systems:
        High power energy storage.......................      -2,000,000
        Advanced power electronics......................      -2,000,000
        Heavy vehicle propulsion systems................      -6,000,000
    Fuel cells:
        Fuel cell systems...............................      -2,000,000
        Fuel processor/storage..........................      -7,000,000
    Advanced combustion engine:
        Hybrid direct injection.........................      -5,000,000
        Combustion & after treatment....................      -5,000,000
    Cooperative automotive research (CARAT).............      -7,000,000
    Electric vehicles/long-term battery research........      -2,000,000
    Heavy vehicle systems...............................      -2,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal, Vehicle Technology......................     -40,000,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Fuels Utilization:
    Advanced petroleum based fuels:
        Light trucks....................................      -3,000,000
        Heavy trucks....................................      -3,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
          Subtotal, Fuels Utilization...................      -6,000,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Materials Technologies:
    Lightweight materials...............................      +5,000,000
    Heavy vehicle high strength weight reduction........      +2,000,000
    HTML/electron microscope............................      +1,500,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal, Materials Technologies..................      +8,500,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Technology Deployment:
    Clean cities........................................      -3,000,000
    Testing and evaluation..............................      -1,000,000
    EPACT replacement fuels.............................        -700,000
    Advanced vehicle competitions.......................        -150,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal, Technology Deployment...................      -4,850,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Management & Planning:
    Technology assessment & analysis....................        -800,000
    Program direction...................................        -500,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal, Management & Planning...................      -1,300,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________

    Policy and Management.--The Committee recommends 
$42,466,000 for policy and management, a decrease of $4,200,000 
below the budget request. Changes to the budget request are 
shown in the following table:

Policy and Management:
    Headquarters contract services:
        Contract support................................      -1,000,000
        Crosscutting support............................        -500,000
    Regional support office contract services...........      -2,000,000
    International market development:
        Energy & environmental security.................        -700,000

    The Committee has agreed to the use of $25,000,000 from the 
Biomass Energy Development account to offset partially new 
funding requirements for energy conservation programs.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. None of the funds provided herein are for the million 
solar roofs initiative. This program is under the purview of 
the Energy & Water Appropriations Subcommittee.
    2. Fiscal year 2000 funding has not been offset by the use 
of prior year unobligated and unexpended balances. Some 
progress has been made in reducing these carryover balances and 
every effort should be made to ensure that progress continues.
    3. The National Academy of Public Administration is 
reviewing the financial management and contracting practices of 
the Energy Conservation program. The Committee expects the 
Department to work closely with NAPA on identifying problems 
and recommended solutions. The fiscal year 2001 budget request 
should reflect program adjustments consistent with NAPA 
recommendations.
    4. The Department has not been following the Committee's 
reprogramming guidelines for Energy Conservation programs. The 
Department should review carefully and revise its practices to 
ensure full compliance with reprogramming requirements. In 
addition, specific, stricter guidance for fiscal year 2000 
programs in the buildings area and the heavy vehicles area is 
provided below. Quarterly accounting reports to the Committee 
of adjustments between and among programs should be 
discontinued.
    5. The Department needs to continue and intensify its 
efforts to consolidate and streamline the buildings research 
program. The budget request for fiscal year 2000 does not 
provide sufficient information for informed decisionmaking by 
the Congress. The answers to Committee questions do little to 
improve upon the insufficient budget justification. The fiscal 
year 2001 budget structure should not be changed and the budget 
justification should indicate clearly narrative and funding 
comparisons for each individual program.
    6. As part of the buildings program consolidation, the 
Committee urges the Department to continue and expand its use 
of broad-based R&D; solicitations that cut across the various 
project areas, and the Department should greatly curtail its 
practice of continuing specific projects from year-to-year 
without competition.
    7. Funding for building sector programs should be continued 
at the fiscal year 1999 level, including the oil heat research 
and development program, unless expressly provided to the 
contrary herein. Any other realignment of funds from 1999 
levels must be approved by the Committee following the 
established reprogramming procedures.
    8. Funding for the weatherization assistance program is 
contingent on a 25 percent cost share from each participating 
State. The Committee understands that not all States will be 
able to meet this requirement quickly. The Committee urges the 
Department to work with each State to ensure that funds are 
made available as soon as the cost-sharing requirement is met. 
The Committee notes that these funds are typically not 
distributed to the States until late in the fiscal year and 
that they are ``no year'' funds and therefore will not expire 
if individual States are unable to meet the cost sharing 
requirement in a timely manner. The $120 million provided in 
this bill in addition to the minimum $30 million in State cost 
sharing will result in at least $150 million for the 
weatherization program as compared with the $154 million in the 
Administration's request. The Committee notes that each State 
is projected to have a funding surplus in fiscal year 1999. 
Twenty-one States had a surplus in excess of 10 percent of 
annual spending in fiscal year 1998 and 13 States had a surplus 
in excess of $1 billion each in fiscal year 1998. 
Weatherization assistance should be supported at the State and 
local levels in addition to receiving Federal support.
    9. The Federal Energy Management Program needs to focus on 
getting delivery orders processed in a timely manner and 
demonstrate proven results prior to any program expansion. It 
should not take more than a couple months to process these 
orders and the Committee understands that it is currently 
taking 12 months.
    10. The funding provided for heavy duty vehicle research 
may not be used to duplicate, compete or conflict with the 
joint consortia program financed through the Departments of 
Transportation and Defense. The Department should coordinate 
with the consortia on the use of these funds to ensure that 
each proposal is distinct from or complementary to consortia 
efforts. Prior to the commitment of any funds in this area the 
Department should receive Committee approval for the use of 
these funds following the existing reprogramming procedures.
    11. Funding for advanced turbine research is consolidated 
in the industry program, but Fossil Energy should continue to 
manage its portions of the program.
    12. The Committee provided additional funding to accelerate 
the energy conservation industrial turbine program in fiscal 
year 1999 and, the 2000 funds recommended should be sufficient 
to complete this program.
    13. Of the funds provided above the 1999 level for 
distributed generation in the industries of the future 
crosscutting activity, $2,000,000 is to study the feasibility 
of initiating a program to improve the efficiency of 
reciprocating engines. The Committee expects the energy 
conservation program to coordinate closely with Fossil Energy 
on reciprocating engine research. The Committee does not object 
to this research being conducted under the fossil energy 
account if that proves to be more appropriate.
    14. Natural gas vehicle research funding for fiscal year 
2000 is $11,100,000 and is to be used for programs determined 
in coordination with industry.
    15. The Committee strongly encourages the Department to use 
FETC expertise in the energy conservation area.
    16. The Northwest Alliance for Transportation Technologies 
should be funded at least at the $3,000,000 level in fiscal 
year 2000.
    17. Grants to States within the 3 different sector programs 
should be closely coordinated with the program managers within 
each of those sectors.
    18. The Committee expects the Department to address the 
House Science Committee's recommendations in developing the 
2001 budget request.
    19. The Committee encourages continued and increased 
coordination, with States and industry to ensure research is 
meaningful and not duplicative. The Committee suggests that one 
area worthy of consideration for coordination with the States 
is alternative fuel school bus projects.
    20. Within the industries of the future/petroleum refining 
program, the Department should consider cost-shared research on 
biocatalytic desulfurization.
    21. The Committee encourages the Department to work with 
the steel industry within the Partnership for a New Generation 
of Vehicles (PNGV) program. Industry reports that a 2,000 pound 
steel-bodied car is an achievable goal. The Committee further 
encourages the Department to continue the original PNGV goals 
with respect to design, performance, recyclability, 
affordability, and safety.
    Bill Language.--Language is included requiring a 25 percent 
State cost share for the weatherization assistance program. 
This issue is discussed in more detail above.

                          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, 1999...........................        $1,801,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         2,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         2,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          +199,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for economic 
regulation, equal to the budget request and an increase of 
$199,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level.

                      strategic petroleum reserve




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $160,120,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       159,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       159,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        -1,120,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $159,000,000 for operation of the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve which is equal to the budget 
request and a decrease of $1,120,000 below the fiscal year 1999 
level.

                         SPR Petroleum Account

    The Committee has not agreed to appropriate $5,000,000 in 
additional funds for the SPR Petroleum Account. Instead, the 
Committee has included transfer authority under Administrative 
Provisions, Department of Energy for use in the event a 
drawdown is necessary.

                   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, 1999...........................       $70,500,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        72,644,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        72,644,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +2,144,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $72,644,000, the budget request, 
for the Energy Information Administration, an increase of 
$2,144,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level.

            administrative provisions, department of energy

    Bill language is recommended in Administrative Provisions, 
Department of Energy, providing authority for the Department to 
borrow from Department of Energy accounts in this bill in the 
event a Strategic Petroleum Reserve drawdown is necessary and 
requiring that borrowed funds be paid back with oil sale 
receipts.

                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 1830's 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 37 hospitals, 60 health centers, 3 school health 
centers, and 46 health stations. Tribes and tribal groups, 
through contracts with the IHS, operate 12 hospitals, 149 
health centers, 4 school health centers, and 233 health 
stations (including 158 Alaska village clinics). The IHS, 
tribes and tribal groups also operate 7 regional youth 
substance abuse treatment centers and more than 2,100 units of 
staff quarters.




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................    $1,950,322,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................     2,094,922,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................     2,085,407,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................      +135,085,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -9,515,000


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


    The Committee recommends $2,085,407,000 for Indian health 
services, a decrease of $9,515,000 below the budget request and 
an increase of $135,085,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level.
    Hospitals and clinics.--The Committee recommends 
$1,005,610,000 for hospitals and clinics, an increase of 
$2,758,000 above the budget request and $56,470,000 above the 
fiscal year 1999 level. Increases to the budget request include 
$4,900,000 for physician pay, $6,064,000 for other pay and 
inflation, $994,000 for staffing, operations and start-up costs 
at new facilities of which $415,000 is for the Hopi, AZ clinic 
and $579,000 is for Talihina, OK, $1,000,000 for diabetes 
screening through the Joslin program, $400,000 for a pharmacist 
residency program, and $400,000 for infant mortality research 
for the Shoalwater Bay Tribe, WA. These increases are offset 
partially by decreases of $6,000,000 for a women's health 
initiative and $5,000,000 for information systems.
    Dental health.--The Committee recommends $78,783,000 for 
dental health, a decrease of $5,577,000 below the budget 
request and an increase of $7,383,000 above the fiscal year 
1999 level. Changes to the budget request include an increase 
of $423,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease of $6,000,000 
for program expansion. The Committee notes that there is still 
a sizable program increase above the 1999 level to expand much 
needed dental services.
    Mental health.--The Committee recommends $43,794,000 for 
mental health services, a decrease of $4,652,000 below the 
budget request and an increase of $2,489,000 above the fiscal 
year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request include an 
increase of $348,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease of 
$5,000,000 for program expansion. The Committee expects the 
Service to distribute the program increase above the 1999 level 
to a limited number of projects rather than distributing it 
equally to all tribes. Such an approach will enable the Service 
to focus on the most pressing needs.
    Alcohol and substance abuse.--The Committee recommends 
$97,024,000 for alcohol and substance abuse treatment and 
prevention programs, an increase of $698,000 above the budget 
request and $2,344,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level. 
Changes to the budget request include an increase of $1,698,000 
for pay and inflation and a decrease of $1,000,000 for program 
expansion.
    Contract health care.--The Committee recommends 
$407,290,000 for contract care, a decrease of $3,152,000 below 
the budget request and an increase of $21,489,000 above the 
fiscal year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request include 
an increase of $6,848,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease 
of $10,000,000 for program expansion.
    Public health nursing.--The Committee recommends 
$33,526,000 for public health nursing, a decrease of $6,837,000 
below the budget request and an increase of $3,163,000 above 
the fiscal year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request 
include an increase of $163,000 for pay and inflation and a 
decrease of $7,000,000 for program expansion.
    Health education.--The Committee recommends $9,654,000 for 
health education, an increase for pay and inflation of $113,000 
above the budget request and $224,000 above the fiscal year 
1999 level.
    Community health representatives.--The Committee recommends 
$47,826,000 for community health representatives, an increase 
of $6,866,000 above the budget request and $1,866,000 above the 
fiscal year 1999 level. Increases include $5,000,000 to restore 
the base program and $1,866,000 for pay and inflation.
    The Committee has not agreed with the Administration's 
proposal to reduce the community health representative program. 
The Committee believes this is an important, essential 
component of the IHS system and notes that, in some instances, 
the local CHR is the only health professional who certain 
patients ever see.
    Immunization.--The Committee recommends $1,407,000 for the 
immunization program in Alaska, an increase of $19,000 above 
the budget request and $40,000 above the fiscal year 1999 
level. The increase is for pay and inflation costs.
    Urban health.--The Committee recommends $27,849,000 for 
urban health projects, a decrease of $1,533,000 below the 
budget request and an increase of $1,467,000 above the fiscal 
year 1999 level. The change to the budget request includes an 
increase of $467,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease of 
$2,000,000 for program expansion.
    Indian health professions.--The Committee recommends 
$30,728,000 for Indian health professions, an increase of 
$1,028,000 above the budget request and $1,105,000 above the 
fiscal year 1999 level for pay and inflation costs.
    Tribal management.--The Committee recommends $2,418,000 for 
tribal management, an increase of $28,000 above both the budget 
request and the fiscal year 1999 level for inflation costs.
    Direct operations.--The Committee recommends $51,145,000 
for direct operations, an increase of $545,000 above the budget 
request and $1,836,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level. The 
increase is for pay and inflation costs.
    Self-governance.--The Committee recommends $9,572,000 for 
self-governance, an increase of $181,000 above both the budget 
request and the fiscal year 1999 level. The increase is for 
inflation costs.
    Contract support costs.--The Committee recommends 
$238,781,000 for contract support costs, which is equal to the 
budget request and an increase of $35,000,000 above the fiscal 
year 1999 level. The increase above the 1999 level reflects a 
different distribution than assumed in the budget request and 
includes $30,000,000 for existing contacts and $5,000,000 for 
new and expanded contracts and is provided contingent on a pro-
rata distribution of funds across all self-determination 
contracts and self-governance compacts.
    The Committee has recommended bill language earmarking the 
amount of funding for contract support costs and requiring a 
proportional distribution of contract support cost funding. The 
$30,000,000 increase for existing contracts is recommended to 
minimize decreases to ongoing contracts and compacts under a 
pro-rata distribution.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Service needs to address contract support cost 
shortfalls in a manner that ensures that increases in this 
program are not at the expense of badly needed increases in 
direct health care programs. Contract support cost funding 
provided last year and in this year's recommendation amounts to 
more than a 40 percent increase over two years. The Committee 
cannot afford to continue such large funding increases for this 
program at the same time as addressing the many critical 
shortfalls in funding for direct health care programs.
    2. The Service should continue to work with the tribes to 
develop level of need calculations for health care services.
    3. The Committee is concerned about the high rate of 
amputations among Native Americans. The Service should develop 
a meaningful plan of action to augment and strengthen its 
podiatry care program and address the shortage of commissioned 
officers in the podiatry field. The IHS should work with other 
institutions, including the American Podiatric Medical 
Association, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and 
the National Institutes of Health in developing this plan.
    4. The Committee continues to be concerned about the infant 
mortality crisis in the Shoalwater Bay Tribe and expects the 
Service to work closely with the tribe, the State, the Centers 
for Disease Control and Prevention and other agencies to 
identify the causes of and potential solutions for infant 
mortality.
    5. The Service should use the funds provided for a pharmacy 
residency program to establish immediately such a program, 
which will help address the critical shortage of pharmacists in 
the Service.
    6. The Service should notify the Committee of how it 
proposes to distribute the program funding above the 1999 level 
for each activity no later than December 15, 1999. This 
includes increases in both the services and the facilities 
accounts. Program funding increases should not be distributed 
across all tribes but should be subject to competitive 
solicitations and awarded to a limited number of projects that 
focus on highest priority needs in each program area.
    Bill language.--Language is recommended limiting the amount 
of funding that can be spent on contract support costs for 
existing contracts and for new and expanded contracts. Language 
also is included stipulating that new and expanded contracts 
are subject to a pro-rata distribution.
    Language is also included under Administrative Provisions, 
Indian Health Service requiring a proportional distribution of 
contract support cost funding across all self-determination and 
self-governance contracts and compacts.

                        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. In 1994, 
IHS conducted a review of facility needs to determine what 
would be required to provide adequate and safe health care 
delivery. The conclusions of the review were that IHS would 
need to replace, renovate or modernize 41 hospitals, 153 full 
service health centers, and 289 part-time health stations, and 
that 12 new health centers and 21 new health stations would 
need to be constructed. Safe and sanitary water and sewer 
systems for existing homes and solid waste disposal needs 
currently are estimated to amount to over $600 million for 
those projects that are considered to be economically feasible.




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................      $291,965,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       317,465,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       312,478,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       +20,513,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -4,987,000


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


    The Committee recommends $312,478,000 for Indian health 
facilities, a decrease of $4,987,000 below the budget request 
and an increase of $20,513,000 above the fiscal year 1999 
level. Changes to the budget request are discussed below.
    Maintenance and improvement.--The Committee recommends 
$43,504,000 for maintenance and improvement, a decrease of 
$4,621,000 below the budget request and $2,879,000 above the 
fiscal year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request include 
an increase of $379,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease of 
$5,000,000 for program expansion.
    Sanitation facilities.--The Committee recommends 
$90,688,000 for sanitation facilities, a decrease of $2,196,000 
below the budget request and increase of $1,360,000 above the 
fiscal year 1999 level. Changes to the budget request include 
an increase of $804,000 for pay and inflation and a decrease of 
$3,000,000 for program expansion.
    Construction.--The Committee recommends $49,803,000 for 
construction, an increase of $7,272,000 above the budget 
request and $11,216,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level. 
Changes to the budget request include increases of $3,000,000 
for staff quarters at Hopi, AZ, $10,000,000 to begin 
construction of the Winnebago, NE hospital and $1,000,000 for 
Zuni staff quarters, and decreases of $1,728,000 for modular 
dental units and $5,000,000 for the Fort Defiance, AZ hospital.
    Facilities and environmental health support.--The Committee 
recommends $114,096,000 for facilities and environmental health 
support, a decrease of $5,586,000 below the budget request and 
an increase of $6,414,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level. 
Changes to the budget request include an increase of $414,000 
for pay and inflation and a decrease of $6,000,000 for program 
expansion.
    Equipment.--The Committee recommends $14,387,000 for 
equipment, an increase of $144,000 above the budget request and 
$1,144,000 above the fiscal year 1999 level. The increase above 
the budget request is for inflation costs.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. Funding to complete quarters construction associated 
with the new Hopi clinic is provided to ensure that this 
project can be completed successfully. The Committee notes that 
the majority of the funding for the quarters construction is 
being borne by the tribe.
    2. The Service should consider a new, consistent approach 
to constructing staff quarters that involves cost sharing by 
the tribes to the extent possible and tribal operation of the 
completed quarters. Funding for quarters construction needs to 
be treated consistently for each project. Currently there are 
quarters projects that have never been built although the 
related hospital or clinic was built; projects that incorporate 
the cost of quarters in with the total cost of the facility 
construction (with no tribal cost share); and projects that are 
left to an individual tribe to fund.
    3. The fiscal year 2001 budget should address the 
advisability of reinstituting a joint venture facilities 
construction program in the context of overall priorities. The 
Committee notes that this is another area of need that has 
``fallen through the cracks'' as funding increases have 
concentrated on addressing the contract support cost shortfall.
    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.
    8. The IHS should continue to support tribes in identifying 
and implementing alternative and innovative approaches to 
funding construction and repair and replacement of health care 
facilities throughout Indian country, including cost-sharing 
arrangements and the enhanced use of third-party collections 
for improving aging facilities. These alternative approaches 
should not result in increased operational funding requirements 
for IHS.
    9. The Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona is interested in 
partnering with the IHS for the construction of an ambulatory 
health care facility on the western side of the Nation's 
property. This facility is currently on the priority list for 
construction. The Committee asks that the Service report no 
later than March 31, 2000 on: (1) an assessment of the need for 
this ambulatory health care facility and how it ranks within 
the current priority system; (2) the status of efforts to 
select a suitable site; and (3) the suitability of this project 
for a joint venture demonstration program.

            Administrative Provisions, Indian Health Service

    Language is recommended requiring a proportional 
distribution of contract support cost funding across all self-
determination and self-governance contracts and compacts. The 
Committee continues to support self-determination and self-
governance programs. These programs have enabled the tribes to 
have greater control and greater involvement in many different 
programs formerly managed by the Indian Health Service. In the 
early years of the self-determination and self-governance 
programs, funds were shifted from Federal programs to offset 
partially the administrative costs of those tribes that elected 
to take over management of IHS programs. These administrative 
costs of the tribes are known as contract support costs. The 
Committee also annually adds additional funds to the IHS budget 
to pay contract support costs. Over time, the contract support 
costs associated with self-determination contracts and self-
governance compacts have outpaced available funding. We have 
reached a point at which we can no longer offset these costs to 
any great extent by continuing to downsize the Federal 
bureaucracy in IHS. To do so would be unfair to the many tribes 
who choose not to manage their own programs and rely on the IHS 
for program management.
    Unfortunately, implementation of the self-determination and 
self-governance programs does not result in economies of scale 
in program management since each participating tribe is 
responsible for its own management. For Federal programs, the 
IHS is able to achieve savings by grouping program management 
responsibilities and funding for a number of tribes. Over the 
past few years, the amount of funding required to pay contract 
support costs has substantially exceeded the total amount of 
management funding that would have been required under the old 
Federal system. The Committee understands that this is a 
necessary consequence of turning programs over to the tribes. 
However, the Committee cannot afford to appropriate 100% of 
contract support costs at the expense of basic program funding 
for tribes. For example, dental health services in the IHS are 
funded at less than 25% of current need. As contract support 
costs continue to increase, and overall funding remains 
relatively constant, direct health care program funding becomes 
a smaller proportion of overall funding.
    The Bureau of Indian Affairs addresses this issue by 
distributing contract support costs on a pro-rata basis. The 
Committee believes that this is the most equitable approach to 
the problem and expects the IHS to do the same in fiscal year 
2000. The approach taken by the IHS in fiscal year 1999, while 
an improvement over past practices, does not address the 
totality of the problem. The current methodology creates a two-
tiered system under which some tribes are paid at a set percent 
of need or ``floor'' and others receive a substantially higher 
percent of need. The additional funding recommended by the 
Committee for fiscal year 2000 will help minimize the effect a 
pro-rata distribution will have on those tribes that currently 
are receiving more than the ``floor'' value.
    The Committee expects the IHS to continue to work with the 
tribes and the legislative committees of jurisdiction to find 
an acceptable solution to the contract support cost funding 
problem. The Committee believes the basic ``fairness'' question 
needs to be addressed with respect to how to distribute limited 
funds between and among the various programs and the management 
of those programs.

                         OTHER RELATED AGENCIES


              Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation


                         salaries and expenses





Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $13,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        14,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        13,400,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          +400,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................          -600,000


    The dispute between the Hopi and Navajo tribes is 
centuries-old. The Hopi were the original occupants of the land 
with their origin tracing back to the Anasazi race whose 
presence is recorded back to 1150 A.D. Later in the 16th 
century the Navajo tribe began settling in this area. The 
continuous occupation of this land by the Navajo led to the 
isolation of the Hopi Reservation as an island within the area 
occupied by the Navajo. 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 larger Navajo tribe and 
the smaller 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 455 households remain to be 
relocated, of which 72 are full-time residents on the Hopi 
Partitioned Land. A total of 3,042 families have been relocated 
from the Hopi Partitioned Land.
    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $13,400,000 
for salaries and expenses of the Office of Navajo and Hopi 
Indian Relocation, which is an increase from the 1999 level of 
$400,000 and a decrease of $600,000 below the budget request.

    Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts 
                              Development


                        payment to the institute




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $4,250,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         4,250,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................                 0
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        -4,250,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -4,250,000


    The Committee recommends zero funding for the Institute of 
American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development. 
It was the understanding of the House that fiscal year 1999 
would be the last year Federal funding would be provided.

                        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.
    It attracted approximately 30,000,000 visitors in 1998 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, 1999...........................      $347,154,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       380,501,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................       371,501,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................       +24,347,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -9,000,000


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


    The Committee recommends $371,501,000, an increase of 
$24,347,000 above the enacted level and a decrease of 
$9,000,000 below the fiscal year 2000 request. This amount 
provides the full $19,429,000 for fixed costs including 
mandatory pay increases, retirement system conversion, utility, 
communications, postage and rent increases as well as $919,000 
in costs associated with the Panama Canal Treaty 
implementation.
    The Committee accepts the reduction of $82,000 for non-
recurring workers' compensation and $4,700,000 for fiscal year 
1999 emergency supplemental funding for the non-recurring Y2K 
compliant portions of the security system.
    The Committee has approved $5,000,000 for the National 
Museum of the American Indian collection's move but has 
disapproved $2,000,000 for the Dulles Center move, $5,000,000 
for Collections Information Access and $2,000,000 for Security 
System Modernization.
    The Committee believes that the $8,000,000 it provided over 
several years for planning and design of the Dulles facility 
fulfilled its financial commitment to the project. The 
Committee is supportive of the Collections Information Access 
program but was unable to provide additional funds because of 
the additional $26,000,000 provided for other Smithsonian 
needs. The Committee would consider a formal reprogramming 
request. The $2,000,000 request for the security system should 
be accommodated out of the increase provided in the Repair, 
Restoration and Alteration of Facilities account.
    The Committee is pleased that the National Museum of 
American History is moving forward to upgrade and modernize a 
number of its exhibits including the agriculture exhibit. The 
Committee hopes that, along with portraying the great 
technological advances made in agriculture, the new exhibit 
will illuminate the relationship between land, food, people and 
agriculture's role in achieving sustainable life systems in our 
fragile ecosystem.
    The Committee urges the Smithsonian Institution to assist 
the Washington Historical Society in the planning, development 
and use of displays, exhibits and programs of significance to 
the history of the City of Washington for the City Museum at 
the Carnegie Library in Washington, D.C.
    The Committee encourages the Presidio Trust and the 
Smithsonian Institution to establish an ``affiliation'' program 
at the Presidio of San Francisco that will enable Smithsonian 
exhibits, artifacts and programs to be made available to the 
public at that national park site.

     repair, restoration and alteration of facilities of buildings




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $40,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        47,900,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        47,900,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +7,900,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $47,900,000 for Repair, 
Restoration and Alteration of Facilities for fiscal year 2000, 
an increase of $7,900,000 from the enacted level and the same 
as the 2000 budget request. The Committee has consolidated 
funding for construction and improvements at the zoo in this 
account as proposed in the budget. The Committee continues to 
believe that addressing the backlog maintenance needs of the 
Institution is the highest priority. Bill language is included 
in this account to permit the transfer and merger of funds from 
the former ``Construction and Improvements, National Zoological 
Park'' account. Bill language also is included under 
Administrative Provisions which prohibits the use of funds to 
work on the Holt House.

                              construction




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $16,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        19,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        19,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +3,000,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $19,000,000 for Construction, an 
increase of $3,000,000 above the enacted level and the same as 
the 2000 budget request. The amount completes the Federal 
construction responsibility for the American Museum of the 
American Indian Mall facility.

                        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, 1999...........................       $57,938,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        61,438,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        61,538,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +3,600,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................          +100,000


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


    The Committee recommends $61,538,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the National Gallery of Art. This amount is an 
increase of $100,000 above the budget request and $3,600,000 
above the fiscal year 1999 level. The increase above the budget 
request is to provide the necessary funds for the newly opened 
sculpture garden to remain open in the evening.

            repair, restoration and renovation of buildings




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $6,311,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         6,311,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         6,311,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $6,311,000 for repair, restoration 
and renovation of buildings at the National Gallery of Art. 
This amount is equal to both the budget request and the fiscal 
year 1999 level.
    The Committee expects the Gallery to work carefully with 
the Administration to address the requirements in the Gallery's 
long range facilities plan. To do so will require an increase 
in the restoration and renovation account in fiscal year 2001 
and in the outyears.

             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 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, 1999...........................       $12,187,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        14,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        12,441,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          +254,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -1,559,000


    The Committee recommends $12,441,000, an increase of 
$254,000 above the enacted level and a decrease of $1,559,000 
below the fiscal year 2000 request. The increase is provided 
for fixed costs.

                              construction




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $20,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        20,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        20,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for construction, the 
same as the enacted level and the fiscal year 2000 request.

            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 the late 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, 1999...........................        $5,840,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         6,040,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         7,040,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +1,200,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        +1,000,000


    The Committee recommends $7,040,000 for salaries and 
expenses, an increase of $1,200,000 above the enacted level and 
an increase of $1,000,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee is extremely pleased with the progress the 
Center has made under its new leadership in implementing the 
recommendations of the National Academy of Public 
Administration. Of particular importance is ensuring that the 
programs of the Center have relevance to current public policy 
issues and that the Center increase its public outreach 
programs.

           National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities


                    National Endowment for the Arts


                       grants and administration




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $83,500,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       137,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        83,500,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -53,500,000


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


    The Committee recommends $83,500,000 for grants and 
administration, which is equal to the 1999 level and 
$53,500,000 below the budget request.

                            matching grants




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $14,500,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        13,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        14,500,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        +1,500,000


    The Committee recommends $14,500,000 for matching grants, 
which is equal to the 1999 level and $1,500,000 above the 
budget request.
    Bill language in Title III retains provisions in last 
year's bill regarding restrictions on individual grants, 
subgranting, and seasonal support (Sec. 317); authority to 
solicit and invest funds (Sec. 318); 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. 320).

                 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, 1999...........................       $96,800,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................       129,800,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        96,800,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................       -33,000,000


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


    The Committee recommends $96,800,000 for grants and 
administration, which is equal to the 1999 level and 
$33,000,000 below the request.

                            matching grants




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $13,900,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        20,200,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        13,900,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -6,300,000


    The Committee recommends $13,900,000 for matching grants, 
equal to the 1999 funding level and $6,300,000 below the 
request.

                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. The OMS appropriation remains in the 
Interior and related agencies bill and the Office of Library 
Services appropriation remains in the Labor, Health and Human 
Services appropriations bill. The OMS provides operating 
support, conservation support and professional services to 
assist museums. General operating support is competitively 
awarded to assist museums with essential operating 
expenditures.




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $23,405,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        34,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        24,400,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          +995,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        -9,600,000


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


    The Committee recommends $24,400,000 for the Office of 
Museum Services, which is $9,600,000 below the request and 
$995,000 above the 1999 level. The increases are intended to 
fund grants under the National Digital Library initiative as 
part of the national leadership grants. The Committee has also 
provided for fixed cost increases for program administration.

                        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, 1999...........................          $898,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         1,078,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................           935,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................           +37,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................          -143,000


    The Committee recommends $935,000 for the Commission of 
Fine Arts, which is $143,000 below the request and $37,000 
above the 1999 funding level. The Committee has provided fixed 
cost increases for program administration. The Committee 
directs that no appropriated funds be used to continue the 
Georgetown architecture project. The Committee has included 
bill language, as requested, giving the Commission of Fine Arts 
authority to charge, and use the resulting receipts without 
subsequent appropriation, for publications or services provided 
by the Commission. The Commission should provide the Committee 
with a report, as part of the normal budget justification 
process, indicating revenues generated by the Commission with 
the new authority and their proposed use.

               National capital arts and cultural affairs




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................        $7,000,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         6,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         7,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................        +1,000,000


    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 for this program, which is equal to the 
1999 level.

               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, 1999...........................        $2,800,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         3,000,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         3,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................          +200,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $3,000,000 for the Advisory 
Council on Historic Preservation, equal to the request and 
$200,000 above the 1999 level. The increased funding is to 
offset fixed cost increases.

                  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, 1999...........................        $5,954,000
Emergency appropriation Year 2000 conversion..........           381,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................         6,312,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................         6,312,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999 (excluding emergency Year 2000
 conver-
      sion funds).....................................          +358,000
    Appropriation, 1999 (including Y2K conversion                -23,000
 funds)...............................................
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $6,312,000, which is equal to the 
budget request, $358,000 above the 1999 normal appropriation 
and $23,000 below the 1999 funding level including the one-time 
emergency appropriation for Year 2000 systems upgrades. The 
Committee recommendation offsets fixed cost increases. The 
Committee has included bill language as requested providing 
permanent authority for appointed members of the Commission to 
be compensated in a manner similar to that which was used the 
past several years. This payment schedule is widely used for 
similar boards and commissions in the Federal government.

                United States Holocaust Memorial Council


                       holocaust memorial council

    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 
have come solely from donated funds raised by the U.S. 
Holocaust Memorial Museum Campaign and appropriated funds have 
been 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.




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $35,007,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        33,786,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        33,286,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        -1,721,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................          -500,000


    The Committee recommends $33,286,000 for fiscal year 2000, 
$1,721,000 below the enacted level and $500,000 below the 
fiscal year 2000 request.
    The $500,000 request was for the first phase of security 
enhancements at the Museum. The Committee provided the full 
amount totaling $2,000,000 in the Fiscal Year 1999 
Supplemental. The Committee has been very generous to the 
Museum, particularly in the area of security needs. It is the 
Committee's understanding that this completes security needs 
for the Museum.

                             Presidio Trust


                          presidio trust fund




Appropriation enacted, 1999...........................       $34,913,000
Budget estimate, 2000.................................        44,400,000
Recommended, 2000.....................................        44,400,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 1999...............................        +9,487,000
    Budget estimate, 2000.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $44,400,000, an increase of 
$9,487,000 above the enacted level and the same as the budget 
request. This amount includes $20,000,000 in loan authority and 
$24,400,000 for operations.

                     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 contains Buy American procedures and 
requirements.
    Section 307 limits the sale of giant sequoia trees by the 
Forest Service.
    Section 308 prohibits the use of funds by the National Park 
Service to enter into a contract requiring the removal of the 
underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns NP, NM.
    Section 309 provides that no funds can be used for 
Americorps unless it is funded in the VA, HUD and Independent 
Agencies fiscal year 2000 appropriations, and makes use of such 
funds subject to reprogramming.
    Section 310 continues a limitation of funding relating to a 
pedestrian bridge between New Jersey and Ellis Island.
    Section 311 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 312 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 313 limits Jobs in the Woods programs to timber 
dependent areas in Washington, Oregon, and northern California.
    Section 314 prohibits the use of recreational fees in 
excess of $500,000 for the construction of any permanent 
structure without advance Committee approval.
    Section 315 prohibits the use of funds for Biosphere 
Reserves as part of the Man and Biosphere Program.
    Section 316 prohibits the use of funds for posting clothing 
optional signs at Canaveral NS, FL.
    Section 317 contains reforms and limitations dealing with 
the National Endowment for the Arts.
    Section 318 permits the collection and use of private funds 
by the National Endowment for the Arts and the National 
Endowments for the Humanities.
    Section 319 limits the use of funds for new or revised 
National forest land management plans with certain exceptions.
    Section 320 continues direction to the National Endowment 
for the Arts on funding distribution.
    Section 321 prohibits 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 322 prohibits the use of funds for the National 
Telecommunications and Information Administration (Spectrum), 
GSA Telecommunication Centers, or the President's Council on 
Sustainable Development.
    Section 323 prohibits the use of funds to make improvements 
to Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House without 
Committee approval.
    Section 324 continues a provision, which permits the Forest 
Service to use the roads and trails fund for backlog 
maintenance and priority forest health treatments.
    Section 325 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
funds to establish a national wildlife refuge in the Kankakee 
River watershed in northwestern Indiana and northeastern 
Illinois.
    Section 326 prevents funds available to the agencies and 
offices funded in this bill from being used to support the 
Council on Environmental Quality or other Executive Office of 
the President functions for purposes related to the American 
Heritage Rivers program. The Committee is concerned that scarce 
agency funds may be diverted to bureaucratic functions that 
should be supported by other appropriations acts if they have 
merit.
    Section 327 prohibits the use of answering machines during 
core business hours except in case of emergency. The American 
taxpayer deserves to receive personal attention from public 
servants.
    Section 328 includes language which authorizes the Forest 
Service to retain and expend administrative fees collected for 
Forest Service rights-of-way and permits collected pursuant to 
land use authorizations. The Committee held a hearing on 
February 10 evaluating various Forest Service land uses and the 
situation regarding cost recovery for administrative fees. At 
this hearing the Forest Service testified that they have 
authority to collect application processing fees and special 
use authorization monitoring fees, commonly called 
administrative fees, but they lack authority to retain and 
expend these fees. The Committee notes that there appears to be 
substantial shortfalls in permit administration. This causes, 
at times, inadequate service to public or commerical interests 
and, just as important, shortfalls at government oversight for 
activities occurring as special uses of Federal lands. The 
Committee expects that this language, which allows the agency 
to recover fees collected, will not only result in better 
service to the permitees, but also increase the protection of 
Federal lands, waters and investments. The Committee also 
expects that this will create an incentive system that will 
further enhance the future administration of special uses, 
thereby improving public service and long term protection of 
Federal lands and investments. Under the current system little 
cost recovery is occurring. The Committee expects the Forest 
Service to use these funds to improve its overall management 
efficiency with specific emphasis on customer service. The 
language further requires information be presented in the 
annual budget justification displaying purposes and amounts 
expended and estimated expenditures by purpose category for the 
coming fiscal year. The Committee will monitor closely the 
agency use of this authority and expect measurable improvements 
in performance if the new authority is to be retained. The 
Committee encourages the Forest Service to evaluate carefully 
fees charged to educational and public service, non-profit 
organizations so that these institutions which enhance public 
service and aided in their activities on NFS lands, consistent 
with the multiple-use mission of the Forest Service.
    Section 329 includes language regarding reports on the 
feasibility and cost of implementing the Interior Columbia 
Basin Ecosystem Management Project. The Committee remains 
concerned about this expensive effort. Previously, the Congress 
required the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior through 
Public Law 105-83 to provide a report detailing specifically 
how the project would be implemented and the impact 
implementation would have on each unit of federal land. This 
section directs the Secretaries to prepare the report prior to 
publication of the final environmental impact statement (EIS), 
distribute the report for public comment for a minimum of 120 
days, and include detailed responses to the public comments in 
the final EIS.
    Section 330 provides authority for breastfeeding in the 
National Park Service, the Smithsonian, the John F. Kennedy 
Center, the Holocaust Memorial Museum and the National Gallery 
of Art.
    Section 331 prohibits the use of funds to propose or issue 
rules, regulations, decrees or orders for implementing the 
Kyoto Protocol prior to Senate ratification.

                              Rescissions

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2), rule XIII of the House of 
Representatives, the following table is submitted describing 
the rescissions recommended in the accompanying bill:

                   rescission recommended in the bill

                                                                 Amounts
                                                         recommended for
        Department and activity                               rescission
Department of the Interior: Land and Water Conservation 
    Fund (contract authority)...........................     $30,000,000

                           Transfer of Funds

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2), rule XIII of the House of 
Representatives, the following table is submitted describing 
the transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill.
    The table shows the appropriations affected by such 
transfers.

                                 APPROPRIATION TRANSFERS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Account to which transfer is to
   Account from which transfer is to be made        Amount                   be made                  Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Energy, Biomass Energy               $24,000,000  Department of Energy, Fossil         $24,000,000
 Development.                                                    Energy Research and Development.
Department of Energy, Alternative Fuels              1,000,000  General Fund of the Treasury....       1,000,000
 Production.
Department of Energy, Biomass Energy                25,000,000  Department of Energy, Energy          25,000,000
 Development.                                                    Conservation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 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. Most of 
these items have been carried in previous appropriations Acts. 
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; 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, 
Management of lands and resources, concerning applications for 
permits to drill for coalbed methane in the Powder River Basin.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Wildland fire management, to permit the use of funds from other 
accounts for firefighting; to permit the use of funds for 
lodging and subsistence of firefighters; and to permit the 
acceptance and use of funds for firefighting.
    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, 
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, to allow 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 no year funding availability for the Lower 
Snake River Compensation Plan; providing for the Natural 
Communities Conservation Planning program and for a Youth 
Conservation Corps; limiting funding for certain Endangered 
Species Act listing program; permitting payment for information 
or rewards in the law enforcement program; permitting the use 
of fines from violations of the Marine Mammal Protection Act; 
earmarking funds for contaminant analysis; permitting the use 
of reimbursable funds provided by private entities; and 
allowing the use of Federal funds in advance of receipt of 
matching funds for certain State, local, or tribal 
partnerships.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Multinational species conservation fund, limiting 
administrative expenses to three percent of available funds.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Administrative provisions, providing for repair of 
damage to public roads; options for the purchase of land not to 
exceed $1; installation of certain recreation facilities; the 
maintenance and improvement of aquaria; the acceptance of 
donated aircraft; cost-shared arrangements for printing 
services. Language also is included to limit 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 is included under National Park Service, Operation 
of the National Park System, providing for a Youth Conservation 
Corps program; and providing for the use of funds in support of 
Everglades land acquisition.
    Language is included under National Park Service, 
Construction, prohibiting assessments by the Denver Service 
Center.
    Language is included under National Park Service, National 
recreation and preservation, limiting technical assistance for 
the Heritage Partnership Programs.
    Language is included under National Park Service, Historic 
preservation fund, permitting the use of fees from the historic 
preservation tax certification program; and striking the last 
sentence of section 403(a) of the National Historic 
Preservation Act of 1966.
    Language is included under National Park Service, 
Construction, permitting the use of fees for stabilization and 
rehabilitation at Ellis Island and making the use of fees 
contingent on a 50% cost share beginning in fiscal year 2001; 
and providing for upgrading the Mariposa County, CA municipal 
solid waste disposal system.
    Language is included under National Park Service, Land 
acquisition and State assistance, to permit the use of funds to 
assist the State of Florida with Everglades restoration; and 
making the use of funds for Everglades contingent on certain 
conditions.
    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; and permitting the use 
of funds for workplace safety needs.
    Language is included under United States 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 payments to interstate compact negotiators; and 
permitting the hiring of temporary employees under certain 
conditions.
    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 and 
providing for collecting royalties and late payment interest on 
amounts received in settlements associated with Federal and 
Indian leases.
    Language is included under Office of Surface Mining 
Reclamation and Enforcement, Regulation and Technology, to 
permit the use of moneys collected pursuant to assessment of 
civil penalties to reclaim lands affected by coal mining after 
August 3, 1977; and to permit 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, 
to limit amounts in the account for acid mine drainage 
activities and for emergency reclamation projects to allow use 
of debt recovery to pay for debt collection; and to allow 
States to use appropriated funds for non-Federal cost sharing 
for acid mine drainage abatement.
    Language also is included to provide a grant to the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for the purpose of conducting a 
demonstration project to determine the efficacy of improving 
water quality by removing metals from waters polluted by acid 
drainage and to allow the State of Maryland to set aside funds 
for acid mine abatement.
    Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
Operation of Indian programs, to limit funds for contract 
support costs and for administrative cost grants for schools; 
to permit advance payments to Indian schools and business 
enterprises; and to permit the use of tribal priority 
allocations for general assistance payments to individuals, for 
contract support costs, and for repair and replacement of 
schools.
    Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
Operation of Indian programs, allowing reprogramming of Self-
Governance funds, allowing changes to certain eligibility 
criteria by tribal governments, allowing the transfer of 
certain forestry funds, 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 conformance with building 
codes and health and safety standards; specifying the procedure 
for dispute resolution; and permitting the use of certain 
overpayments for school construction.
    Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
Administrative provisions, to prohibit funding of Alaska 
schools; to limit the number of schools and the expansion of 
grade levels in individual schools; to limit the use of funds 
for contracts, grants and cooperative agreements and permitting 
tribes to return funds without diminishing government-to-
government relationships.
    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; deferring some of the capital improvement 
funding for the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands 
from fiscal year 2000 to fiscal year 2003; providing an 
additional payment to Guam for compact impact assistance; 
providing a grant to the Close-Up foundation; and allowing 
appropriations for disaster assistance to be used as non-
Federal matching funds for hazard mitigation grants provided 
pursuant to other law.
    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; and exempting quarterly 
statements for accounts less than $1.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, Indian 
land consolidation pilot, permitting a reservation-wide system 
for establishing fair market values; limiting acquisition to 
situations where there is owner consent; and making sale 
proceeds available for appropriation.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, 
Administrative provisions, prohibiting the use of working 
capital or consolidated working funds to augment certain 
offices; allowing the sale of existing aircraft with proceeds 
used to offset the purchase price of replacement aircraft; and 
exempting the Office of Special Trustee for American Indians 
from issuing checks less than $1.
    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.
    Language is included under General provisions, Department 
of the Interior, providing for expanded employee benefits to 
compensate for the closure of the helium program through fiscal 
year 2002.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, to limit the use of funds for contract support 
costs; to prohibit fee exemptions for non-local traffic through 
National Parks; to permit the leasing of space in the Interior 
South Building; and to change the name of the Steel Industry 
American Heritage Area to the ``Rivers of Steel National 
Heritage Area''.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, allowing the use of rebates from credit cards; 
permitting the use of unobligated balances for trust reform 
efforts; exempting the Fort Baker, Golden Gate National 
Recreation Area from taxes and assessments and permitting 
certain lease arrangements at Fort Baker; requiring grazing 
permit renewals at Lake Roosevelt National Recreation Area; 
allowing grazing permit renewals by the Bureau of Land 
Management under certain conditions; and providing for 
administrative law judges to handle Indian issues.
    Language is included under Forest Service, national forest 
system, allowing administrative funds to be used for expenses 
associated with the management of funds provided under other 
Forest service appropriation accounts; allowing 50 percent of 
the funds collected under the Land and Water Conservation Fund 
Act to be expended; and requiring the fiscal year 2001 budget 
justification to display unobligated balances available at the 
start of fiscal year 2000.
    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 1999, excepting 
hazardous fuels funding, to be transferred to the Knutson-
Vandenberg fund as repayment for past advances; and providing 
for a grant for the Joint Fire Science program.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Reconstruction 
and maintenance, allowing funds to be used for road 
decommissioning; requiring that no road decommissioning be 
funded until notice and an opportunity for public comment has 
been provided; and merging unobligated balances from the 
national forest system account for facility and trail 
maintenance and unobligated balances from the reconstruction 
and construction account with the new reconstruction and 
maintenance account.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Land 
acquisition, making funds available from the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund for administrative expenses and for 
acquisition; and, subject to valid existing rights, withdrawing 
from mineral entry or disposal all Federally owned lands and 
interests in lands within the New World Mining District, MT.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Range Betterment 
Fund, to provide that 6 percent of the funds may be used for 
administrative expenses.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative 
provisions, to provide that proceeds from the sale of aircraft 
may be used to purchase replacement aircraft; limiting the 
availability of funds to change the boundaries of or abolish 
any region or to move or close any regional office or provide 
for reorganization. Language is also provided to allow any 
funds available to the Secretary of Agriculture to be used for 
advances for firefighting and emergency rehabilitation of 
damaged lands if and only if all previously appropriated 
emergency contingent wildfire funds have been released by the 
President and apportioned; to allow funds to be used through 
the Agency for International Development and the Foreign 
Agricultural Service for work in foreign countries, and to 
support forestry activities outside of the United States.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative 
provisions, to prohibit the following without the advance 
approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations: 
(1) the transfer of funds under the Department of Agriculture 
transfer authority; (2) reprogramming of funds; and (3) 
transfer of funds to the working capital fund of the Department 
of Agriculture.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative 
provisions, to provide for a Youth Conservation Corps program; 
allowing funds to be used for representation expenses by the 
Chief; 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 to 
be available for sustainable rural development; permitting the 
transfer of certain funds to the State of Washington fish and 
wildlife department for planned projects; providing that funds 
shall be available for payment to counties within the Columbia 
River Gorge National Scenic Area pursuant to Public Law 99-663, 
providing authority to the Pinchot Institute for activities at 
Grey Towers National Historic Landmark; allowing payments to 
Del Norte County, CA pursuant to Public Law 101-612; limiting 
employee details; and permitting limited reimbursements to the 
Office of General Counsel in USDA.
    Language is included under Department of Energy, Fossil 
energy research and development, limiting the field testing of 
nuclear explosives for the recovery of oil and gas; providing 
for activities at the Albany Research Center, OR; and requiring 
the transfer of funds from the Biomass Energy Development 
account.
    Language is included under Department of Energy, Naval 
Petroleum and oil shale reserves waiving sales requirements 
based on Strategic Petroleum Reserve oil purchases; and 
permitting the use of unobligated balances.
    Language is included under Department of Energy, 
Alternative fuels production, transferring receipts to the 
General Fund in the Treasury Department.
    Language is included under Department of Energy, Energy 
conservation, providing allocations of grants to State and 
local programs; requiring a 25 percent State cost share for the 
weatherization assistance program; and requiring the transfer 
of funds from the Biomass Energy Development account.
    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; permitting the use of contributions and fees 
for cooperative projects; and permitting transfer of funds for 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve drawdown and requiring the 
repayment of such transferred funds.
    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 new contracts; 
capping contract support cost spending and requiring a pro-rata 
distribution for new contracts; and providing for use of 
collections under Title IV of the Indian Health Care 
Improvement Act.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, Indian 
health facilities, providing that funds may be used to purchase 
land, modular buildings and trailers.
    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, to prevent the Indian Health Service 
from billing Indians in order to collect from third-party 
payers until Congress has agreed to implement a specific 
policy; and to require a proportional distribution of contract 
support costs.
    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; and prohibiting changing the 
appropriations structure without approval of the Appropriations 
Committees.
    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 Smithsonian Institution, 
Salaries and expenses, to allow 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; and permitting the use of certain funds for the Victor 
Building.
    Language is included under Smithsonian Institution, Repair 
and restoration of buildings, to permit the Smithsonian 
Institution to select contractors for certain purposes on the 
basis of contractor qualifications as well as price; and 
permitting the merger of funds previously appropriated to zoo 
construction.
    Language is included under Administrative Provisions, 
Smithsonian Institution, to limit planning, design or expansion 
of facilities without Committee approval; and to limit the use 
of funds for the Holt House at the zoo; and limiting funds for 
construction of the National Museum of the American Indian.
    Language is included under National Gallery of Art, 
Salaries and expenses, for payment in advance for membership in 
library, museum, and art associations or societies; 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, 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 on the Arts 
and the Humanities, Matching grants (for both the NEA and NEH), 
to allow for the 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, limiting the use 
of funds for reception expenses.
    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 Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation to restrict hiring anyone at Executive Level V or 
higher positions.
    Language is included under National Capital Planning 
Commission, salaries and expenses, to provide for 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 programs and 
museums exhibitions.
    Language is included under Presidio Trust Fund requiring 
that guaranteed loans be consistent with the Congressional 
Budget Act of 1974.
    Language is included under Title III--General provisions to 
prohibit the use of funds to distribute literature either to 
promote or oppose legislative proposals on which Congressional 
action is incomplete.
    Language is included under Title III--General provisions, 
to prohibit the use of funds to provide personal cooks, 
chauffeurs or other personal servants to any office or 
employee; to limit use of consulting services; to specify that 
funds are for one year unless provided otherwise.
    Language is included under Title III--General provisions, 
prohibiting assessments against programs funded in this bill; 
and providing Buy American requirements.
    Language is included under Title III--General provisions, 
prohibiting the sale of giant sequoia trees in a manner 
different from 1995.
    Language is included under Title III--General provisions, 
prohibiting the use of funds by the National Park Service to 
enter into a concession contract requiring the removal of the 
underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns NP.
    Language is included under Title III--General provisions, 
limiting use of funds for the AmeriCorps program; and limiting 
use of funds relating to a bridge between New Jersey and Ellis 
Island.
    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, 
to permit limiting competition under the Jobs in the Woods 
program; requiring Committee approval prior to using 
recreational fees for constructing certain permanent buildings; 
limiting funds for nomina-

tions for Biosphere programs of the United Nations; limiting 
funds for posting clothing optional signs at Cape Canaveral NS; 
making reforms in the National Endowment for the Arts, 
including funding distribution reforms; permitting the National 
Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities to collect, invest 
and use private donations; limiting the use of funds for forest 
land management plans until regulations have been published; 
limiting funds for improvements to Pennsylvania Avenue in front 
of the White House without Committee approval; providing 
additional authority to the Secretary of Agriculture to use the 
ten percent roads and trails fund for additional purposes; 
limiting the use of funds for any government-wide 
administrative functions and, specifically for Spectrum, GSA 
telecommunications centers, and the President's Council on 
Sustainable Development; prohibiting the establishment of a 
Kankakee National Wildlife Refuge in IL and IN; prohibiting the 
use of funds for certain administrative functions of the 
American Heritage Rivers program; providing authority for 
breastfeeding at certain locations; and limiting the use of 
funds relating to the Kyoto Protocol.

                  Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

    Pursuant to clause 3 of rule XIII of the House of 
Representatives, the following table lists the appropriations 
in the accompanying bill which, in whole or in part, are not 
authorized by law:

Department of the Interior:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Resource Management
National Park Service, National Recreation and Preservation

Department of Energy:

Fossil Energy Research and Development
Energy Conservation
Economic Regulation
Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Energy Information Administration

Other Related Agencies:

National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities:
    National Endowment for the Arts
    National Endowment for the Humanities
    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.

                  Compliance With Rule XIII--Clause 3

    In compliance with clause 3 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 403(a) of the National Historic Preservation is 
amended as follows:
    (a) There is hereby established within the Department of 
the Interior a National Center for Preservation Technology and 
Training. [The Center shall be located at Northwestern State 
University of Louisiana in Natchitoches, Louisiana.]
    Section 4, subsections (b) and (c) of Public Law 94-241, as 
amended by Public Law 104-140, is further amended as follows:
    (b) Upon the expiration of the period of Federal financial 
assistance which is provided to the Government of Northern 
Mariana Islands pursuant to section 1803 of this title, 
payments of direct grant assistance shall continue at the 
annual level provided for the last fiscal year of the 
additional period of seven fiscal years expect that, for fiscal 
years 1996 through [2002] 1999, payments to the Commonwealth of 
the Northern Mariana Islands pursuant to the multi-year funding 
agreements contemplated under the Covenant shall be $11,000,000 
annually[,] and for fiscal year 2000, payments to the 
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands shall be 
$6,000,000, but shall return to the level of $11,000,000 
annually for fiscal years 2001 and 2002. In fiscal year 2003, 
the payment to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands 
shall be $5,000,000. Such payments shall be subject to an equal 
local match and all other requirements set forth in the 
Agreement of the Special Representatives on Future Federal 
Financial Assistance of the Northern Mariana Islands, executed 
on December 17, 1992 between the special representative of the 
President of the United States and special representatives of 
the Governor of the Northern Mariana Islands with any 
additional amounts otherwise made available under this section 
in any fiscal year and not required to meet the schedule of 
payments in this subsection to be provided as set forth in 
subsection (c) until Congress otherwise provides by law.
    (c) The additional amounts referred to in subsection (b) 
shall be made available to the Secretary for obligation as 
follows:
          (1) for fiscal years 1996 through 2001, $4,580,000 
        annually for capital infrastructure projects as Impact 
        Aid for Guam under section 104(c)(6) of Public Law 99-
        239;
          (2) for fiscal year 1996, $7,700,000 shall be 
        provided for capital infrastructure projects in 
        American Samoa; $4,420,000 for resettlement of Rongelap 
        Atoll; [and]
          (3) for fiscal years 1997 and thereafter, all such 
        amounts shall be available solely for capital 
        infrastructure projects in Guam, the Virgin Islands, 
        American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern 
        Mariana Islands, the Republic of Palau, the Federated 
        States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall 
        Islands: Provided, That in fiscal year 1997, $3,000,000 
        of such amounts shall be made available to the College 
        of the Northern Marianas and beginning in fiscal year 
        1997, and in each year thereafter, not to exceed 
        $3,000,000 may be allocated, as provided in 
        appropriations Acts, to the Secretary of the Interior 
        for use by Federal agencies or the Commonwealth of the 
        Northern Mariana Islands to address immigration, labor, 
        and law enforcement issues in the Northern Mariana 
        Islands. The specific projects to be funded in American 
        Samoa shall be set forth in a five-year plan for 
        infrastructure assistance developed by the Secretary of 
        the Interior in consultation with the American Samoa 
        Government and updated annually and submitted to the 
        Congress concurrent with the budget justifications for 
        the Department of the Interior. In developing budget 
        recommendations for capital infrastructure funding, the 
        Secretary shall indicate the highest priority projects, 
        consider the extent to which particular projects are 
        part of an overall master plan, whether such project 
        has been reviewed by the Corps of Engineers and any 
        recommendations made as a result of such review, the 
        extent to which a set-aside for maintenance would 
        enhance the life of the project, the degree to which a 
        local cost-share requirement would be consistent with 
        local economic and fiscal capabilities, and may propose 
        an incremental set-aside, not to exceed $2,000,000 per 
        year, to remain available without fiscal year 
        limitation, as an emergency fund in the event of 
        natural or other disasters to supplement other 
        assistance in the repair, replacement, or hardening of 
        essential facilities: Provided further, That the 
        cumulative amount set aside for such emergency fund may 
        not exceed $10,000,000 at any time[.]; and
          (4) for fiscal year 2000, $5,000,000 shall be 
        provided to Guam.

                    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......................................           $14,057
Outlays:
    Fiscal year 2000..................................             9,302
    Fiscal year 2001..................................             3,788
    Fiscal year 2002..................................               785
    Fiscal year 2003..................................               294
    Fiscal year 2004 and future years.................                49


               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..................................            $1,016
Fiscal year 2000 outlays resulting therefrom..........               531


                          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.
    
    
                            Additional Views

    The major problem with this year's Interior and Related 
Agencies Appropriations Bill is not what it does--it is what it 
does not do. The penurious budget allocation provided the 
subcommittee, while a vast improvement over the earlier target 
of only $11.3 billion, simply does not allow this bill to 
address adequately the myriad needs facing our nation's 
historical, cultural and geographical treasures.
    The greatest shortfall occurs in the Administration's Lands 
Legacy Initiative. The President's budget requested the full 
authorization of $900 million for the land and water 
conservation fund for fiscal year 2000, including $795 million 
in the Interior Bill. Unfortunately, the bill reported from 
committee includes only $165 million, or 20 percent, of the 
budget request. That amount is less than one-half of the 
funding made available for land and water conservation projects 
in 1999. The result of this inadequate funding will be missed 
opportunities with the likely outcome of increased development 
and commercialization in and near some of our nation's most 
spectacular public places. According to the Department of the 
Interior, there is a land acquisition backlog of more than $5 
billion for 4.5 million acres located within boundaries of 
park, refuge and recreation units. At 1998 land prices, 
allowing nothing for inflation, the existing backlog would take 
more than 30 years to purchase. There apparently are some 
Members of Congress who believe the federal government owns too 
much real estate already. However, there is a large and growing 
segment of the public that realizes how fragile and important 
our national parks, refuges, and forests are, and is willing to 
spend tax dollars to protect and preserve these holdings.
    The land acquisition backlog does not begin to address the 
totality of unfunded needs facing the bureaus and agencies 
included in the Interior Appropriations Bill. The Department of 
the Interior estimates its deferred maintenance backlog to be 
up to $15 billion. The Forest Service estimates it would need 
$8 billion to satisfy its current maintenance backlog. If 
deferred capital improvements are included, the amount of the 
Forest Services total unmet needs nearly doubles. According to 
a needs-based budget developed by the tribes, the Indian Health 
Service should request $8 billion for services and facilities 
instead of the $2.4 billion contained in this bill. And the 
unmet needs exist not only for the larger agencies funded in 
this bill. The Smithsonian Institution estimates it currently 
needs at least $250 million and probably more to bring some of 
its aging museums and facilities up to code. The Kennedy Center 
estimates its maintenance and repair requirement will be $30 
million and its capital renewal program will require $150 
million over the next few years.
    While the Committee's bill adequately funds the 
uncontrollable and inflationary costs of most of the agencies, 
the overall allocation barely allows agencies to keep even with 
their maintenance backlogs, much less try to reduce them. As 
every homeowner knows only too well, delaying repairs for 
whatever reason almost always mean the repairs cost more and 
are more extensive when finally done. If the funding levels 
assumed under the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 are adhered to 
for fiscal years 2001 and 2002, the backlog of unmet needs for 
agencies in the Interior and Related Agencies Bill undoubtedly 
will increase significantly. An important point to remember is 
that most of the maintenance backlog and unmet needs estimates 
do not assume increased demands on facilities, parks and 
forests. Annual visitation figures for national parks, forests, 
refuges and other facilities have been increasing dramatically 
in recent years. Many press accounts tell about how we, as a 
people, are ``loving our parks to death.'' Annual visits to 
units in the National Park System are approaching 300 million. 
A little known fact is that visits to our National Forests 
exceed those to our National Parks. In the next few decades, 
considerable infrastructure and construction costs will be 
necessary to equip and prepare our parks and forests for the 
increasing crush of visitors. The status quo budgets of the 
past few years and those assumed in the future do little to 
prepare our national treasures for future demands they are 
likely to experience.
    Another area where the Committee's bill falls far short of 
desired funding is for the National Foundation on the Arts and 
the Humanities. Total recommended funding for the National 
Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the 
Humanities is only $208.7 million, a 30 percent reduction from 
the requested level of $150 million for each Endowment. The 
Administration's budget this year includes a new initiative for 
the NEA called Challenge America, which had elements 
specifically targeted to increasing access to the arts and to 
making youth at risk more aware of the arts. The effects of the 
shortsightedness of underfunding the NEA and NEH for yet 
another year will reverberate throughout our society for a long 
time.
    In summary, the funding recommendations contained in this 
bill will do much for our nation and its cultural, physical and 
historical heritage. But when compared to the outstanding needs 
that cry out to be addressed, they fall far short of the mark.

                                                        David Obey.