Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                       Calendar No. 945
106th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     106-495

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



 
  WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAMS IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2000

                                _______
                                

   October 10 (legislative day, September 22), 2000.--Ordered to be 
                                printed

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Smith of New Hampshire, from the Committee on Environment and 
                 Public Works, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [to accompany H.R. 3671]

                             together with

                             minority views

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was 
referred a bill to amend the Acts popularly known as the 
Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act and the Dingell-
Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act to enhance the funds 
available for grants to States for fish and wildlife 
conservation projects and increase opportunities for 
recreational hunting, bow hunting, trapping, archery, and 
fishing by eliminating opportunities for waste, fraud, abuse, 
maladministration, and unauthorized expenditures for 
administration and execution of those Acts, and for other 
purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 
with an amendment and recommends that the bill, as amended, do 
pass.

                           General Background

    The Pittman-Robertson Act and the Dingell-Johnson Act 
(later called the Wallop-Breaux Act), authorized in 1937 and 
1950, respectively, created user-pay benefit trust funds. 
Together, these programs are called the Sport Fish and Wildlife 
Restoration programs and are known more generally as the 
Federal Aid program. The Pittman-Robertson program is funded 
through an 11 percent tax on sporting firearms, ammunition, and 
archery equipment, and a 10 percent tax on pistols and 
revolvers. The Wallop-Breaux program is funded through a 10 
percent tax on fishing equipment, and a 3 percent tax on fish 
finders and electric trolling motors. Funds collected by these 
programs are distributed to the States by formulas established 
in law. Since its inception, the Pittman-Robertson Act has 
provided over $4 billion for State wildlife restoration 
projects; the Wallop-Breaux Act has provided over $3.6 billion 
for State sport fish projects. In fiscal year 2000, the States 
received a total of $434 million for the Pittman-Robertson and 
Wallop-Breaux programs.
    The States are primarily responsible for managing the 
wildlife restoration and sport fish programs. They identify 
eligible projects and then pay for the projects up front. The 
projects must be directly related to wild and sport fish 
restoration efforts. Projects that are eligible for funding 
through the Pittman-Robertson and Wallop-Breaux programs 
include: acquisition and improvement of wildlife habitat; 
hunter education; wildlife population surveys; construction of 
facilities to improve public access; management of wildlife 
areas; fish stocking, boating and fishing access; and facility 
development and maintenance. States are reimbursed for up to 75 
percent of the total cost of each project from the wildlife 
restoration and sport fish funds. To qualify for the funds, 
State game and fish departments are required to dedicate 
license fees paid by hunters to the administration of State 
fish and game departments. This provides a source of funding 
for the States to provide the non-Federal share of any grant.
    The Fish and Wildlife Service administers the wildlife 
restoration and sport fish programs through the Division of 
Federal Aid. Under the Pittman-Robertson and Wallop-Breaux 
Acts, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to use up to 
8 percent of the funds that are collected under the Pittman-
Robertson Act to administer the wildlife restoration program, 
and up to 6 percent of the funds collected under the Wallop-
Breaux Act to administer the sport fish program. In fiscal year 
1999, the programs received a total of approximately $377 
million; the Fish and Wildlife Service used $33.6 million of 
the funds to administer the two programs, which was the maximum 
allowable amount.
    Lands purchased with Pittman-Robertson funds are used for 
many wildlife-dependent recreation activities; each parcel is 
supposed to support multiple uses. Concerns have been raised 
recently, however, that the Fish and Wildlife Service is 
considering prohibiting the use of Pittman-Robertson lands for 
field trials. Field trials are dog competitions in which tests 
and training or related activities are conducted to improve the 
hunting abilities of, and identify those superior 
representatives of, the hunting breeds, as well as the skills 
of hunters. Field trials are a legitimate use of Pittman-
Robertson funded lands, provided that the field trials are not 
inconsistent with the objectives and purposes of the Act.
    Because wildlife conservation is the primary purpose of the 
Pittman-Robertson Act, only field trials that do not adversely 
affect wildlife or wildlife conservation objectives are viewed 
as an acceptable use of Pittman-Robertson acquired lands. A 
type of field trial not generally appropriate for lands 
acquired with Pittman-Robertson funds would be one that 
requires significant manipulation of terrain, landscape, or 
vegetation, or intensive site management. Intensive site 
management in this context would include regular mowing, 
permanent stables, dog kennels, equipment storage areas or 
other infrastructure onsite, which would degrade the value of 
the land as wildlife habitat. Additionally, field trials 
proposed to be conducted during nesting or breeding seasons of 
the wildlife species for which the land was acquired would not 
be appropriate.
    In contrast, field trials which require minimal 
manipulation of terrain, vegetation, or habitat would be 
appropriate if timed to avoid the breeding and nesting seasons 
of the species for which the land was acquired. Proposals for 
field trials which fall between these examples, or which would 
conflict with hunting seasons or other public uses, would 
require case-by-case evaluations and decisions.

                General Accounting Office Investigation

    In December 1998, the Government Accounting Office (GAO) 
began an oversight review of the Fish and Wildlife Service's 
administration of the Federal Aid program. The GAO 
investigation found that the Fish and Wildlife Service, among 
other things, failed to maintain adequate controls over funds, 
expenditures, and grants; used administrative funds 
inconsistently among different FWS regional offices; and had 
conducted limited auditing of the use of funds. A 1993 
investigation by the GAO found similar problems. At that time, 
the Fish and Wildlife Service indicated that it was taking 
steps to address the problems. The 1998 investigation revealed 
that the changes promised had not been implemented.
    During the 1998 investigation, GAO raised significant 
concerns regarding the accountability, oversight, and control 
of the Federal Aid program. Among other things, GAO found that 
the Fish and Wildlife Service had created two new programs 
unrelated to the administration of the wildlife restoration and 
sport fish programs and was funding these new programs with 
Federal Aid program dollars. The two new programs were: the 
Administrative Grants program and the Director's Conservation 
Fund. The Administrative Grants program, which was supported by 
the States, was created to fund projects that would benefit a 
majority of the States. The Administrative Grants program was 
allegedly created with funds that were left over from the 
administration and execution of the Pittman-Robertson and 
Wallop-Breaux programs. However, the Pittman-Robertson and 
Wallop-Breaux Acts require that any funds not used for the 
administration of the programs within a 2-year period must be 
returned to the States. Proponents of the Administrative Grants 
program argued that this program effectively returned excess 
administrative funds to the States through additional regional 
restoration projects that benefited multiple States.
    The second new program, the Director's Conservation Fund, 
was more controversial. The Director's Conservation Fund was 
created in 1994 for use exclusively by the Director of the Fish 
and Wildlife Service to make discretionary grants. The 
Conservation Fund withheld $1 million annually from the Federal 
Aid program for conservation grants selected by the Director of 
the Fish and Wildlife Service. The Fund has been used to award 
grants totaling over $3.8 million. The procedures for obtaining 
grants under this Fund are much less rigorous than those for 
obtaining funds under the programs set up under the Federal Aid 
program. Moreover, critics argue that the criteria used to 
select conservation projects are subjective. Also, GAO reported 
that the Fish and Wildlife Service did not follow the Office of 
Management and Budget's guidelines requiring agencies awarding 
grants to notify the public of funding priorities for 
discretionary grant programs.
    The GAO investigation and subsequent oversight hearings in 
the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and the 
House Committee on Resources raised additional concerns about 
unnecessary foreign travel; poor record keeping; and poor 
oversight of regional offices. For example, the GAO report 
indicated that through mismanagement and inadequate internal 
controls, the Fish and Wildlife Service had maintained two sets 
of accounting books with a discrepancy of $108 million between 
them. Since the report was issued, the Fish and Wildlife 
Service has been able to account for all of the money. The 
Service's accounting records, however, raised questions about 
whether the administrative expenses were in fact legitimate. 
There was evidence, for example, that some of the 
administrative expenses claimed were attributable not to the 
Federal Aid program, but instead to other Fish and Wildlife 
Service functions and were reallocated to make up for 
shortfalls in annual appropriations to other programs. Further, 
questions were raised regarding whether certain expenses, such 
as reimbursements for certain foreign travel or training were 
justified, even within the Federal Aid program.

                       Objectives of Legislation

    This legislation addresses the problems that were 
identified in the GAO report and subsequent Congressional 
oversight hearings by making three fundamental changes to the 
wildlife restoration and sport fish programs. These changes are 
intended to enhance accountability with the Fish and Wildlife 
Service with respect to the administration of the Federal Aid 
program; to provide further clarity regarding the use of 
administrative funds; and to provide additional flexibility to 
the States for regional conservation projects. First, the bill 
authorizes a fixed sum that the Secretary of Interior may set 
aside for administration of both the Pittman-Robertson and 
Wallop-Breaux programs. Second, the bill enumerates legitimate 
administrative costs and limits the use of Federal Aid to those 
expenses. Finally, the bill authorizes a new Multistate 
Conservation Grant program to allow for the use of some Federal 
Aid funds to be used for regional projects.

                      Section-By-Section Analysis

Section 1. Short title; table of contents
    Section 1 contains the bill title and the table of 
contents.

                      TITLE I-WILDLIFE RESTORATION

Sec. 101. Expenditures for Administration

                                Summary

    Section 101(a) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to 
use $9,500,000 million in fiscal year 2001 for the 
administration of the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration 
Act. In subsequent years, the funds available for 
administration of the Act are adjusted for cost-of-living 
increases in accordance with the Consumer Price Index for All 
Urban Consumers published by the Department of Labor. If the 
Secretary of the Interior does not use the authorized funds, 
the remaining amount is to be reallocated among the States.
    Section 101(b) explicitly identifies 12 categories of 
appropriate administrative expenses. Among other things, these 
include personnel costs of employees directly administering the 
wildlife restoration program; costs associated with reviewing 
State comprehensive plans and projects; certain overhead costs; 
costs incurred in auditing State sport fish and wildlife 
conservation activities; necessary training of Federal and 
State personnel administering the Pittman Robertson Act; 
foreign travel; and relocation expenses. If the Secretary of 
the Interior determines that it is necessary to spend funds on 
an administrative expense that is not authorized, the Secretary 
is required to submit a letter to the Senate Committee on 
Environment and Public Works and the House Committee on 
Resources describing the expense. The Secretary of the Interior 
is required to wait 30 days before spending the money in order 
to give the committees time to review the appropriateness of 
the expenditure. In addition, the Secretary of the Interior is 
no longer authorized to supplement general appropriation funds 
with Pittman-Robertson funds for any department or agency 
within the Department of the Interior.
    Section 101(d) directs the Inspector General of the 
Department of the Interior to contract out a biennial audit on 
the use of funds by the Secretary to administer the Pittman 
Robertson Act. The audit must be performed by an entity that is 
not associated with the Department of the Interior. The results 
of the audit are to be provided to the Secretary of the 
Interior, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 
and the House Committee on Resources.

                               Discussion

    One of the most significant concerns raised by the GAO 
report was that the Fish and Wildlife Service was using 
administrative funds made available under the Pittman-Robertson 
program for a variety of activities that are not administrative 
in nature or not related to the program. For example, GAO found 
that funds were being spent on travel unrelated to the Federal 
Aid program and on unauthorized grants. In order to avoid this 
problem in the future, the bill authorizes 12 specific 
categories of expenses that are considered appropriate 
administrative costs. The manager's amendment also included a 
new provision that would allow the Secretary of the Interior to 
request authorization from the Senate Environment and Public 
Works Committee and the House Natural Resources Committee to 
use Pittman Robertson funds for other legitimate administrative 
costs. This provision was added to address a concern raised by 
the Fish and Wildlife Service that the bill's list of 12 
categories of administrative expenses may unintentionally 
exclude an otherwise appropriate type of administrative 
activity that has not yet been identified. The provision 
requires the Secretary to submit a letter to the committees 
describing the nature of the expense. If the committees do not 
reply within 30 days, the Administration has the authority to 
spend the additional funds. The Secretary of the Interior 
should not expend the funds for the purpose requested if the 
committees of jurisdiction object.
    Several witnesses at the committee's July 19, 2000 hearing 
on H.R. 3671, as passed by the House, expressed concern that 
the bill did not provide adequate funding for the 
administration of the wildlife conservation and sport fish 
programs. The States, in particular, indicated that the 
authorized amounts were ``not believed to adequately and 
effectively deliver apportioned funds to the States.'' As 
amended by the committee, the bill now authorizes $9,500,000 
for the Pittman-Robertson Act and $9,500,000 for the Dingell-
Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act. Together, $19,000,000 is 
authorized for the administration of both programs. After 
extensive discussion with the Fish and Wildlife Service, it was 
determined that 120 full time employees were necessary to 
administer both programs (until recently, the programs were 
authorized to employ more than 150 full time employees). On 
average, the Fish and Wildlife Service estimated that each 
employee receives $78,800 per year in salary and benefits, and 
that the overhead cost per person is approximately $77,800. For 
120 full time employees, the Federal Aid program needs 
approximately $19 million to effectively administer both 
programs.
    To prevent future mismanagement of the Pittman-Robertson 
program, the Inspector General of the Department of the 
Interior is required to contract an entity to perform a 
biennial audit of the Federal Aid program. The findings have to 
be reported to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public 
Works and the House Natural Resources Committee.
Sec. 102. Firearm and Bow Hunter Education and Safety Program Grants

                                Summary

    Section 102 authorizes $7,500,000 from the Pittman-
Robertson account to be distributed to the States in the form 
of grants for hunter, firearm, bow hunter, and archery 
education, safety and development programs. In addition, the 
funds can be used for the development and construction of 
firearm and archery ranges. Grants provided to the States under 
this section can not exceed 75 percent of the total cost of the 
activity. Any funds remaining at the end of the fiscal year are 
required to be reapportioned to the States.

                               Discussion

    Under current law, States may use, at their discretion, up 
to 50 percent of the revenues collected from handgun and 
archery equipment for hunter education and shooting range 
development. Concerns have been raised, however, by several 
organizations that represent the hunting and angler community 
that several States have not been fully funding their safety 
and training programs, or using Federal funds to construct 
hunting and archery ranges. In a survey done by the 
International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies for 
fiscal year 1999, the 43 States who responded indicated that 
they spent in excess of $26 million on hunter safety and 
education; $18 million of this amount was funded with money 
from the Pittman-Robertson program. Many States reported that 
they were spending the maximum amount allowed on education and 
training. A number of States also spend funds from other 
sources on hunter education and training, as well as on the 
construction of hunting and archery ranges. To encourage States 
that are not maximizing the use of Pittman-Robertson funds, 
this provision requires States to spend a minimum of $7,500,000 
million to enhance hunter and safety education.
Sec. 103. Multistate Conservation Grant Program

                                Summary

    Section 103 authorizes the Secretary to use $3,500,000 in 
Pittman-Robertson funds to issue grants for projects that 
benefit 26 States, a majority of the States in a Fish and 
Wildlife Service Region, or the regional association of State 
fish and game departments. The Secretary is required to choose 
projects from a list submitted by the International Association 
of Fish and Wildlife Service Agencies (International). The 
Secretary is only authorized to award grants to a State or 
group of States; the Fish and Wildlife Service for purposes of 
carrying out the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and 
Wildlife Associated Recreation; or nongovernmental 
organizations.
    When preparing the list of projects, the International 
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies must consult with 
nongovernmental organizations representing conservation and 
sportsmen organizations, and industries that support or promote 
hunting, trapping, recreational shooting, bow hunting, or 
archery. The International then submits a list of proposed 
projects to the Chief of the Division of Federal Aid by October 
1, of each fiscal year. The Chief of the Division of Federal 
Aid may only select projects for funding from the list received 
from the International. The Chief of the Division of Federal 
Aid is also required to publish the list in the Federal 
Register.
    In order for a nongovernmental organization to receive 
funding for a project under the multistate grant program, the 
organization must certify that it does not promote or encourage 
opposition to regulated hunting or trapping. In addition, the 
organization cannot use a grant awarded under this section to 
support any activity, project or program that promotes or 
encourages opposition to regulated hunting or trapping. If the 
organization violates either of these conditions, it is subject 
to penalties under law and must return all funds received under 
this program.
    Any funds remaining at the end of the fiscal year are 
required to be reapportioned to the States.

                               Discussion

    In 1994, the Office of Federal Aid established an 
Administrative Grant program that utilized administrative funds 
to support national fish and wildlife projects that provided 
collective benefits to at least 50 percent of the States. 
Although the program was extremely popular, it was questionable 
whether the Service had the authority to establish this type of 
grant program. The Fish and Wildife Service abolished the 
program in 1999 for this reason.
    This bill authorizes a new multistate grant program that is 
substantially similar to the old Administrative Grant program 
and provides $3,500,000 for the new program. The Multistate 
grant program is expected to fund projects that benefit a 
majority of the States, such as the National Survey of Fishing, 
Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation, Hooked on Fishing-
Not on Drugs, and the National Outdoor Ethics Conference. This 
grant program will serve an important function because these 
projects, and others, are widely acknowledged to be necessary, 
but in most cases cannot be funded in a cost-effective manner 
by any one State.
    The bill also recognizes that nongovernmental 
organizations, not just the States and the Fish and Wildlife 
Service, can play a valuable role in carrying out regional 
wildlife conservation projects. At the same time, however, the 
bill recognizes the legitimate concern of the user groups that 
pay the excise taxes that fund these programs that Pittman-
Robertson dollars must not be used to promote or encourage 
anti-hunting or anti-trapping activities. For this reason, the 
bill expressly prohibits any nongovernmental organization from 
using funds under the Multistate Grant program to promote or 
encourage opposition to hunting or trapping. Similarly, the 
bill precludes an organization that itself promotes or 
encourages opposition to regulated hunting or trapping from 
receiving funds under this program. However, nothing in the 
bill precludes an organization from establishing an affiliate 
that is physically and financially separate and that does not 
oppose hunting or trapping from applying for a grant under this 
program.

                    TITLE II-SPORT FISH RESTORATION

Sec. 201. Expenditures for Administration
    Section 201(a) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to 
use $9,500,000 million in fiscal year 2001 for the 
administration of the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration 
Act. In subsequent years, the funds available for 
administration of the Act are adjusted for cost-of-living 
increases in accordance with the Consumer Price Index for All 
Urban Consumers published by the Department of Labor. If the 
Secretary of the Interior does not use the authorized funds, 
the remaining amount is to be reallocated among the States.
    Section 201(b) explicitly identifies 12 categories of 
appropriate administrative expenses. Among other things, these 
include personnel costs of employees directly administering the 
wildlife restoration program; costs associated with reviewing 
State comprehensive plans and projects; certain overhead costs; 
costs incurred in auditing State sport fish activities; 
necessary training of Federal and State personnel administering 
the Wallop-Breaux Act; foreign travel; and relocation expenses. 
If the Secretary of the Interior determines that it is 
necessary to spend funds on an administrative expense that is 
not authorized, the Secretary is required to submit a letter to 
the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and the 
House Committee on Resources describing the expense. The 
Secretary of the Interior is required to wait 30 days before 
spending the money in order to give the committees time to 
review the appropriateness of the expenditure. In addition, the 
Secretary of the Interior is no longer authorized to supplement 
general appropriation funds with Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish 
Restoration funds for any department or agency within the 
Department of the Interior.
    Section 201(d) directs the Inspector General of the 
Department of the Interior to contract out a biennial audit on 
the use of funds by the Secretary to administer the Pittman 
Robertson Act. The audit must be performed by an entity that is 
not associated with the Department of the Interior. The results 
of the audit are to be provided to the Secretary of the 
Interior, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works 
and the House Committee on Resources.
Sec. 202. Multistate Conservation Grant Program

                                Summary

    Section 202 authorizes the Secretary to use $3,500,000 in 
Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration funds to issue grants 
for projects that benefit 26 States, a majority of the States 
in a Fish and Wildlife Service Region, or the regional 
association of State fish and game departments. The Secretary 
is required to choose projects from a list submitted by the 
International Association of Fish and Wildlife Service 
Agencies. The Secretary is only authorized to award grants to a 
State or group of States; the Fish and Wildlife Service for 
purposes of carrying out the National Survey of Fishing, 
Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation; or nongovernmental 
organizations.
    When preparing the list of projects, the International 
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies must consult with 
nongovernmental organizations representing conservation and 
sportsmen organizations, and industries that support or promote 
hunting, trapping, recreational shooting, bow hunting, or 
archery. The International then submits a list of proposed 
projects to the Chief of the Division of Federal Aid by October 
1, of each fiscal year. The Chief of the Division of Federal 
Aid may only select projects for funding from the list received 
from the International. The Chief of the Division of Federal 
Aid is also required to publish the list in the Federal 
Register.
    Any funds remaining at the end of the fiscal year are 
required to be reapportioned to the States.
    This section also provides a total of $2,100,000 in funding 
for a variety of programs including: $200,000 each for the 
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission, the Gulf States 
Marine Fisheries Commission, the Pacific States Marine 
Fisheries Commission, the Great Lakes Fisheries Commission; 
$400,000 for the Sport Fishing and Boating Partnership Council; 
and $900,000 for the construction and renovation of pump out 
stations and waste reception facilities, coastal wetlands 
conservation grants under section 305 of the Coastal Wetlands 
Planning, Protection and Restoration Act, boating 
infrastructure grants under section 7404 of the Sportfishing 
and Boating Safety Act of 1998, and the National Outreach and 
Communications Programs established under section 8(d).

                               Discussion

    In 1994, the Office of Federal Aid established an 
Administrative Grant program that utilized administrative funds 
to support national fish and wildlife projects that provided 
collective benefits to at least 50 percent of the States. 
Although the program was extremely popular, it was questionable 
whether the Service had the authority to establish this type of 
grant program. The Fish and Wildife Service abolished the 
program in 1999 for this reason.
    This bill authorizes a new multistate grant program that is 
substantially similar to the old Administrative Grant program 
and provides $3,500,000 for the new program. The Multistate 
grant program is expected to fund projects that benefit a 
majority of the States, such as the National Survey of Fishing, 
Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recreation, Hooked on Fishing-
Not on Drugs, and the National Outdoor Ethics Conference. This 
grant program will serve an important function because these 
projects, and others, are widely acknowledged to be necessary, 
but in most cases cannot be funded in a cost-effective manner 
by any one State.
    The bill also recognizes that nongovernmental 
organizations, not just the States and the Fish and Wildlife 
Service, can play a valuable role in carrying out regional 
wildlife conservation projects. At the same time, however, the 
bill recognizes the legitimate concern of the user groups that 
pay the excise taxes that fund these programs that Dingell-
Johnson Sports Fish Restoration dollars must not be used to 
promote or encourage anti-hunting or anti-trapping activities. 
For this reason, the bill expressly prohibits any 
nongovernmental organization from using funds under the 
Multistate Grant program to promote or encourage opposition to 
hunting or trapping. Similarly, the bill precludes an 
organization that itself promotes or encourages opposition to 
regulated hunting or trapping from receiving funds under this 
program. However, nothing in the bill precludes an organization 
from establishing an affiliate that is physically and 
financially separate and that does not oppose hunting or 
trapping from applying for a grant under this program.

         TITLE III-WILDLIFE AND SPORT FISH RESTORATION PROGRAMS

Sec. 302. Implementation Report

                                Summary

    Section 302 requires the Secretary of the Interior to 
submit a report to Congress 3 years after the date of enactment 
on the implementation of the Act; disbursement of funds to the 
States; justification of Administrative expenses; and the 
findings of the audits. The report should also include 
information on the personnel reduction that has resulted as a 
result of compliance with the Act and recommendations on 
legislative changes that are needed to administer the program 
more effectively.

                               Discussion

    The report to Congress will make the Fish and Wildlife 
Service's administration of the Federal Aid program transparent 
to Congress, and will aid Congress in conducting oversight to 
prevent future mismanagement.

                      Regulatory Impact Statement

    In compliance with section 11(b) of the Standing Rules of 
the Senate, the committee makes the following evaluation of the 
regulatory impact of the reported bill. The reported bill will 
have no regulatory impact. This bill will not have any adverse 
impact on the personal privacy of any individuals.

                          Mandates Assessment

    In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Public Law 104-4), the committee finds that H.R. 3671 would 
impose no Federal intergovernmental unfunded mandates on State, 
local, or tribal governments. All of the bill's directives are 
imposed on Federal agencies. The bill does not directly impose 
any private sector mandates.

                                Hearings

    On July 19, 2000, the Senate Committee on Environment and 
Public Works Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Water held 
an oversight hearing to receive testimony on the Fish and 
Wildlife Service's administration of the Federal Aid program. 
Witnesses who testified were: The Honorable Jamie Clark, 
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Mr. Barry Hill, 
Associate Director for Energy, Resources, and Sciences, General 
Accounting Office; Mr. Max Peterson, Executive Vice President, 
International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies; Ms. 
Susan Lamson, Director of Conservation and Natural Resources, 
National Rifle Association; Mr. Mike Nussman, Vice President, 
American Sport Fishing Association; and Dr. Terry Riley, 
Director of Conservation, Wildlife Management Institute.

                          Legislative History

    On April 6, 2000, H.R. 3671, a bill to amend the Acts 
popularly known as the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration 
Act and the Dingell-Johnson Sports Fish Restoration Act was 
referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public 
Works. A hearing was held on this bill in the Subcommittee on 
Fisheries, Wildlife and Water on July 19, 2000. The Committee 
on Environment and Public Works held a business meeting to 
consider this bill on September 21 and 28, 2000. Senator Smith 
offered a manager's amendment in the nature of a substitute and 
a second degree amendment consisting of technical amendments. 
The manager's amendment and the second degree amendment were 
adopted by voice vote on September 21, 2000. On September 28, 
2000, H.R. 3671, as amended, was favorably reported out of the 
committee by voice vote, with Senator Boxer recorded in 
opposition.

                          Cost of Legislation

    Section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment 
Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the 
reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be 
included in the report. That statement follows:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                   Washington, DC, October 4, 2000.

Hon. Robert C. Smith, Chairman,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.

Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared 
the enclosed revised cost estimate for H.R. 3671, the Wildlife 
and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement Act of 2000. 
This supercedes our estimate of October 3, 2000, our previous 
estimate incorrectly stated that the legislation contained a 
private-sector mandate; this estimate corrects that mistake.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Deborah Reis, 
who can be reached at 226-2860.
            Sincerely,
                                            Dan L. Crippen.
                              ----------                              


               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

H.R. 3671, Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs, Improvement 
        Act of 2000, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on 
        Environment and Public Works on September 28, 2000
    CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3671 would have no net 
impact on the Federal budget. Because the Act could affect the 
timing of outlays from direct spending authority, pay-as-you-go 
procedures would apply. We estimate, however, that the net 
impact on Federal spending would not be significant in any 
year. H.R. 3671 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on State, local, or tribal 
governments.
    H.R. 3671 would amend the Federal Aid in Wildlife 
Restoration Act and the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration 
Act to reduce the amounts that may be spent for administering 
grants for fish and wildlife restoration. Specifically, for 
each of the two grant programs carried out under these acts, 
the legislation would limit spending for administrative 
expenses to $9.5 million in 2001, and to that amount, adjusted 
for inflation, for each year thereafter.
    Under existing law, the amounts set aside for such expenses 
are calculated as a percentage of total deposits to the two 
funds each year. The annual deposits consist of excise taxes 
(primarily on fishing and hunting equipment), import duties, 
and interest earnings. All such amounts, including those used 
for administration, are available without appropriation in the 
year following deposit. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
which oversees both programs, allocates 8 percent annually to 
administer the Federal aid-wildlife program ($17 million in 
2000) and 6 percent to administer the sport fish program ($16 
million in 2000). By capping administrative costs, the 
legislation would reduce such costs in the future, however, 
this savings would be offset by an equal amount of additional 
grant expenditures.
    H.R. 3671 also would create a new program for hunting 
education and safety, to be funded with up to $7.5 million of 
each year's revenues. In addition, it would set aside up to 
$3.5 million from each of the two funds for multistate 
conservation grants. These new authorized expenditures would 
not increase the total amount of spending for fish and wildlife 
restoration but rather would offset funding for other existing 
grants.
    On October 3, 2000, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for 
H.R. 3671 as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on 
Environment and Public Works on September 28, 2000. That 
estimate incorrectly stated that the act contains a private-
sector mandate, as defined in UMRA. This revised estimate 
corrects that mistake.
    On March 23, 2000, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 
3671 as ordered reported by the House Committee on Resources on 
March 15, 2000. The two versions of the legislation are 
similar, and the estimated effects on the Federal budget are 
the same. The House version of H.R. 3671 would, however, impose 
a private-sector mandate on the International Association of 
Fish and Wildlife Agencies. The cost of that mandate would not 
be significant. The Senate version does not contain any 
mandates.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Deborah Reis, 
who can be reached at 226-2860. This estimate was approved by 
Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget 
Analysis.
                    Minority Views of Senator Boxer

    H.R. 3671, the Wildlife and Sportfish Restoration Programs 
Improvement Act of 2000, is a generally positive bill that will 
likely improve the administration of the Federal Aid program. 
While the Federal Aid program's reputation has suffered from 
recent allegations regarding mismanagement, the program has a 
long history of making important and substantial contributions 
to the conservation of our nation's wildlife and wildlife 
habitat. I strongly support efforts to improve and promote this 
program.
    I have had to withhold my support from H.R. 3671, however, 
because it includes an egregious provision that will do nothing 
to promote the success of the Federal Aid program, but that 
will blatantly violate the First Amendment's guarantee of free 
speech.
    The provision that concerns me is part of the two 
multistate conservation grant programs. These programs provide 
grants to support projects that meet the purposes of the 
Federal Aid program, but that benefit several States rather 
than just a single State. To qualify for one of these grants, a 
project must meet certain requirements and must be included on 
a list of priority projects recommended by the International 
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. The grant may not be 
used for a project that promotes or encourages opposition to 
regulated hunting, trapping, or fishing. Furthermore, the bill 
requires that the applicant organization certify that the 
organization itself does not in any way ``promote or encourage 
opposition'' to regulated hunting, trapping, or fishing.
    Therefore, if an organization wants to submit an 
application for a perfectly worthy project, it is barred from 
doing so if it advocates a position that could be interpreted 
as opposition to regulated hunting, trapping, or fishing. For 
example, an organization could not submit a grant to restore 
habitat for migratory waterfowl if it has at any time advocated 
for restrictions on the use of steel-jaw leghold traps. If a 
pro-hunting organization submitted the identical grant proposal 
for a project on migratory waterfowl, however, that 
organization would be eligible for the Federal funds.
    This provision is fundamentally offensive. It seeks to 
punish, through the withholding of a Federal benefit, 
organizations that oppose hunting, trapping, or fishing. In 
other words, this provision punishes organizations because of 
their beliefs and their related advocacy regarding important 
matters of public policy.
    By doing so, I believe that the provision violates the 
First Amendment's protection of free speech. I understand that, 
in 1991, a divided Supreme Court upheld a Congressional 
restriction on the use of funds by family planning clinics, 
based, in part, on the clinics' advocacy of abortion rights 
(Rust v. Sullivan). In Rust v. Sullivan and other relevant 
cases, the Court has found that the government has the right to 
provide Federal funds for certain activities and prevent them 
from being used for others. I am not arguing with the idea that 
Federal Aid projects should be limited to activities that will 
not undermine or oppose regulated hunting, fishing, or 
trapping. In Rust v. Sullivan, however, the Court distinguished 
that limitations on Federal grant eligibility do not violate 
the First Amendment so long as they do not force a Federal 
grant recipient to give up other activities that are funded 
using non-Federal funds. This bill would do just that. It would 
not only limit how an organization may use the Federal Aid 
funds, but it would also seek to limit how the organization 
uses any of its funds. I find this to be unacceptable.
    Aside from questions of Constitutionality, the provision 
suffers from being extraordinarily vague. An organization is 
excluded from eligibility if it ``promotes or encourages 
opposition to'' regulated hunting, trapping, or fishing. Does 
this mean that an organization is disqualified because it has 
taken a single position, in a letter to Congress, that could be 
construed to oppose some form of hunting, trapping, or fishing? 
What if the organization generally supports hunting, but 
opposes a specific type of hunting? The language is 
sufficiently vague to make it nearly impossible for a potential 
applicant organization to interpret with any confidence. 
Despite this lack of precision, the bill includes a provision 
to penalize any organization that receives a grant, but is 
later deemed to have been ineligible because of its opposition 
to hunting, trapping, or fishing. The combination of vague 
guidelines and subsequent undefined ``penalties'' for failure 
to meet these guidelines is likely to prevent some 
organizations from ever applying for these grants.
    The First Amendment to the Constitution provides that 
``Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of 
speech.'' Without question, this right to free speech is one of 
the defining features of our country. Indeed, it is a right 
that many people have given their lives to defend. While it may 
be worthwhile to pass legislation that improves management of 
the Federal Program, it is certainly not worth doing so at the 
expense of any American's First Amendment rights. Any 
organization that intends to use Federal Aid dollars for 
projects that promote the purposes of the Pittman-Robertson and 
Wallop-Breaux Acts should be eligible for those Federal 
dollars--regardless of what those organizations do, say, or 
think in any other context.
    For this reason, I will work aggressively to delete this 
provision; and, if unsuccessful, will oppose the bill.
                        Changes in Existing Law

    In compliance with section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 
Rules of the Senate, 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:
                              ----------                              


                        ACT OF SEPTEMBER 2, 1937

                  (Chapter 899; 50 Stat. 917 et seq.)

(Popularly known as the ``Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act'' and 
          the ``Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act'')

   AN ACT To provide that the United States shall aid the States in 
         wildlife-restoration projects, and for other purposes.



           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
    [Sec. 4. (a) So much, not to exceed 8 per centum, of the 
revenues (excluding interest accruing under section 3(b)) 
covered into said fund in each fiscal year as the Secretary of 
the Interior may estimate to be necessary for his expenses in 
the administration and execution of this Act and the Migratory 
Bird Conservation Act shall be deducted for that purpose, and 
such sum is authorized to be made available therefor until the 
expiration of the next succeeding fiscal year, and within sixty 
days after the close of such fiscal year the Secretary of the 
Interior shall apportion such part thereof as remains 
unexpended by him, if any, and make certificate thereof to the 
Secretary of the Treasury and to the State fish and game 
departments on the same basis and in the same manner as is 
provided as to other amounts authorized by this Act to be 
apportioned among the States for such current fiscal year. The 
Secretary of the Interior, after making the aforesaid 
deduction, shall apportion, except as provided in subsection 
(b) of this section, the remainder of the revenue in said fund 
for each fiscal year among the several States in the following 
manner: One-half in the ratio which the area of each State 
bears to the total area of all the States, and one-half in the 
ratio which the number of paid hunting-license holders of each 
State in the second fiscal year preceding the fiscal year for 
which such apportionment is made, as certified to said 
Secretary by the State fish and game departments, bears to the 
total number of paid hunting-license holders of all the States. 
Such apportionments shall be adjusted equitably so that no 
State shall receive less than one-half of 1 per centum nor more 
than 5 per centum of the total amount apportioned. The term 
fiscal year as used in this Act shall be a period of twelve 
consecutive months from October 1 through the succeeding 
September 30, except that the period for enumeration of paid 
hunting-license holders shall be a State's fiscal or license 
year.]
SEC. 4. ALLOCATION AND APPORTIONMENT OF AVAILABLE AMOUNTS.
    (a) Set-Aside for Administrative Expenses.--
            (1) In general.--
                    (A) Set-aside.--For fiscal year 2001 and 
                each fiscal year thereafter, of the revenues 
                (excluding interest accruing under section 
                3(b)) covered into the fund for the fiscal 
                year, the Secretary of the Interior may use not 
                more than the available amount specified in 
                subparagraph (B) for the fiscal year for 
                administrative expenses incurred in 
                implementation of this Act, in accordance with 
                this subsection and section 9.
                    (B) Available amounts.--The available 
                amount referred to in subparagraph (A) is--
                            (i) for fiscal year 2001, 
                        $9,500,000; and
                            (ii) for fiscal year 2002 and each 
                        fiscal year thereafter, the sum of--
                                    (I) the available amount 
                                for the preceding fiscal year; 
                                and
                                    (II) the amount determined 
                                by multiplying--
                                            (aa) the available 
                                        amount for the 
                                        preceding fiscal year; 
                                        and
                                            (bb) the change, 
                                        relative to the 
                                        preceding fiscal year, 
                                        in the Consumer Price 
                                        Index for All Urban 
                                        Consumers published by 
                                        the Department of 
                                        Labor.
            (2) Period of availability; apportionment of 
        unobligated amounts.--
                    (A) Period of availability.--For each 
                fiscal year, the available amount under 
                paragraph (1) shall remain available for 
                obligation for use under that paragraph until 
                the end of the fiscal year.
                    (B) Apportionment of unobligated amounts.--
                Not later than 60 days after the end of a 
                fiscal year, the Secretary of the Interior 
                shall apportion among the States any of the 
                available amount under paragraph (1) that 
                remains unobligated at the end of the fiscal 
                year, on the same basis and in the same manner 
                as other amounts made available under this Act 
                are apportioned among the States for the fiscal 
                year.
    (b) Apportionment to States.--''; and
            (3) in subsection (b) (as designated by paragraph 
        (2)), by striking ``after making the aforesaid 
        deduction, shall apportion, except as provided in 
        subsection (b) of this section,'' and inserting ``after 
        deducting the available amount under subsection (a), 
        the amount apportioned under subsection (c), any amount 
        apportioned under section 8A, and amounts provided as 
        grants under sections 10 and 11, shall apportion.
    [(b)] (c) One-half of the revenues accruing to the fund 
under this Act each fiscal year (beginning with the fiscal year 
1975) from any tax imposed on pistols, revolvers, bows, and 
arrows shall be apportioned among the States in proportion to 
the ratio that the population of each State bears to the 
population of all the States: Provided, That each State shall 
be apportioned not more than 3 per centum and not less than 1 
per centum of such revenues and Guam, the Virgin Islands, 
American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands shall each be 
apportioned one-sixth of 1 per centum of such revenues. For the 
purpose of this subsection, population shall be determined on 
the basis of the latest decennial census for which figures are 
available, as certified by the Secretary of Commerce.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    Sec. 8. (a) Maintenance of wildlife-restoration projects 
established under the provisions of this Act shall be the duty 
of the State in accordance with their respective laws. 
Beginning July 1, 1945, the term ``wildlife-restoration 
project'', as defined in section 2 of this Act, shall include 
maintenance of completed projects. Notwithstanding any other 
provisions of this Act, funds apportioned to a State under this 
Act may be expended by the State for management (exclusive of 
law enforcement and public relations) of wildlife areas and 
resources.
    (b) Each State may use the funds apportioned to it under 
[section 4(b) of this Act] section 4(c) to pay up to 75 per 
centum of the costs of a hunter safety program and the 
construction, operation, and maintenance of public target 
ranges, as a part of such program. The non-Federal share of 
such costs may be derived from license fees paid by hunters, 
but not from other Federal grant programs. The Secretary shall 
issue not later than the 120th day after the effective date of 
this subsection such regulations as he deems advisable relative 
to the criteria for the establishment of hunter safety programs 
and public target ranges under this subsection.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [Sec. 9. Out of the deductions set aside for administering 
and executing this Act and the Migratory Bird Conservation Act, 
the Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to employ such 
assistants, clerks, and other persons in the city of Washington 
and elsewhere, to be taken from the eligible lists of the Civil 
Service; to rent or construct buildings outside of the city of 
Washington; to purchase such supplies, materials, equipment, 
office fixtures, and apparatus; and to incur such travel and 
other expenses, including purchase, maintenance, and hire of 
passenger-carrying motor vehicles, as he may deem necessary for 
carrying out the purposes of this Act.]
SEC. 9. REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS CONCERNING USE OF AMOUNTS FOR 
        ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.
    (a) Authorized Administrative Costs.--Except as provided in 
subsection (b), the Secretary of the Interior may use available 
amounts under section 4(a)(1) only for administrative expenses 
that directly support the implementation of this Act, 
consisting of--
            (1) personnel costs of employees who directly 
        administer this Act on a full-time basis;
            (2) personnel costs of employees who directly 
        administer this Act on a part-time basis for at least 
        20 hours each week, not to exceed the portion of those 
        costs incurred with respect to the work hours of an 
        employee during which the employee directly administers 
        this Act, as those hours are certified by the 
        supervisor of the employee;
            (3) support costs directly associated with 
        personnel costs authorized under paragraphs (1) and 
        (2), excluding costs associated with staffing and 
        operation of regional offices of the United States Fish 
        and Wildlife Service and the Department of the Interior 
        other than for the purposes of this Act;
            (4) costs of determining under section 6(a) whether 
        State comprehensive plans and projects are substantial 
        in character and design;
            (5) overhead costs, including the costs of general 
        administrative services, that are directly attributable 
        to administration of this Act and are based on--
                    (A) actual costs, as determined by a direct 
                cost allocation methodology approved by the 
                Director of the Office of Management and Budget 
                for use by Federal agencies; and
                    (B) in the case of costs that are not 
                determinable under subparagraph (A), an amount 
                per full-time equivalent employee authorized 
                under paragraphs (1) and (2) that does not 
                exceed the amount charged or assessed for costs 
                per full-time equivalent employee for any other 
                division or program of the United States Fish 
                and Wildlife Service;
            (6) costs incurred in auditing, every 5 years, the 
        wildlife and sport fish activities of each State fish 
        and game department and the use of funds under section 
        6 by each State fish and game department;
            (7) costs of audits under subsection (d);
            (8) costs of necessary training of Federal and 
        State full-time personnel who administer this Act to 
        improve administration of this Act;
            (9) costs of travel to States, territories, and 
        Canada by personnel who--
                    (A) administer this Act on a full-time 
                basis for purposes directly related to 
                administration of State programs or projects; 
                or
                    (B) administer grants under section 6, 10, 
                or 11;
            (10) costs of travel by personnel outside the 
        United States (except travel to Canada) that relates 
        directly to administration of this Act and that is 
        approved directly by the Assistant Secretary for Fish 
        and Wildlife and Parks;
            (11) relocation expenses for personnel who, after 
        relocation, will administer this Act on a full-time 
        basis for at least 1 year, as certified by the Director 
        of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service at the 
        time at which the relocation expenses are incurred; and
            (12) costs to audit, evaluate, approve, disapprove, 
        and advise concerning grants under section 6, 10, or 
        11.
    (b) Reporting of Other Uses.--If the Secretary of the 
Interior determines that available amounts under section 
4(a)(1) should be used for an administrative expense other than 
an administrative expense described in subsection (a), the 
Secretary--
            (1) shall submit to the Committee on Environment 
        and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on 
        Resources of the House of Representatives a report 
        describing the administrative expense; and
            (2) may use any such available amounts for the 
        administrative expense only after the end of the 30-day 
        period beginning on the date of submission of the 
        report under paragraph (1).
    (c) Restriction on Use To Supplement General 
Appropriations.--The Secretary of the Interior shall not use 
available amounts under section 4(a)(1) to supplement the 
funding of any function for which general appropriations are 
made for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service or any 
other entity of the Department of the Interior.
    (d) Audit Requirement.--
            (1) In general.--The Inspector General of the 
        Department of the Interior shall procure the 
        performance of biennial audits, in accordance with 
        generally accepted accounting principles, of 
        expenditures and obligations of amounts used by the 
        Secretary of the Interior for administrative expenses 
        incurred in implementation of this Act.
            (2) Auditor.--
                    (A) In general.--An audit under this 
                subsection shall be performed under a contract 
                that is awarded under competitive procedures 
                (as defined in section 4 of the Office of 
                Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 403)) 
                by a person or entity that is not associated in 
                any way with the Department of the Interior 
                (except by way of a contract for the 
                performance of an audit).
                    (B) Supervision of auditor.--The auditor 
                selected under subparagraph (A) shall report 
                to, and be supervised by, the Inspector General 
                of the Department of the Interior, except that 
                the auditor shall submit a copy of the biennial 
                audit findings to the Secretary of the Interior 
                at the time at which the findings are submitted 
                to the Inspector General of the Department of 
                the Interior.
            (3) Report to congress.--The Inspector General of 
        the Department of the Interior shall promptly report to 
        the Committee on Resources of the House of 
        Representatives and the Committee on Environment and 
        Public Works of the Senate on the results of each audit 
        under this subsection.
SEC. 10. FIREARM AND BOW HUNTER EDUCATION AND SAFETY PROGRAM GRANTS.
    (a) In General.--Of the revenues covered into the fund for 
a fiscal year, $7,500,000 shall be apportioned among the States 
in the manner specified in section 4(b) by the Secretary of the 
Interior and used to make grants to the States to be used for--
            (1) the enhancement of hunter education programs, 
        hunter and sporting firearm safety programs, and hunter 
        development programs;
            (2) the enhancement of interstate coordination and 
        development of hunter education and shooting range 
        programs;
            (3) the enhancement of bow hunter and archery 
        education, safety, and development programs; and
            (4) the enhancement of construction or development 
        of firearm shooting ranges and archery ranges, and the 
        updating of safety features of firearm shooting ranges 
        and archery ranges.
    (b) Cost Sharing.--The Federal share of the cost of any 
activity carried out with a grant under this section shall not 
exceed 75 percent of the total cost of the activity.
    (c) Period of Availability; Reapportionment.--
            (1) Period of availability.--A grant under this 
        section shall remain available only for the fiscal year 
        for which the grant is made.
            (2) Reapportionment.--At the end of the period of 
        availability under paragraph (1), the Secretary of the 
        Interior shall apportion any grant funds that remain 
        available among the States in the manner specified in 
        section 4(b) for use by the States in accordance with 
        this section.
SEC. 11. MULTISTATE CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM.
    (a) In General.--
            (1) Amount for grants.--Not more than $3,500,000 of 
        the revenues covered into the fund for a fiscal year 
        shall be available to the Secretary of the Interior for 
        making multistate conservation project grants in 
        accordance with this section.
            (2) Period of availability; apportionment.--
                    (A) Period of availability.--A grant under 
                this subsection shall remain available only for 
                the fiscal year for which the grant is made and 
                the following fiscal year.
                    (B) Apportionment.--At the end of the 
                period of availability under subparagraph (A), 
                the Secretary of the Interior shall apportion 
                any grant funds that remain available among the 
                States in the manner specified in section 4(b) 
                for use by the States in the same manner as 
                funds apportioned under section 4(b).
    (b) Selection of Projects.--
            (1) States or entities to be benefited.--A project 
        shall not be eligible for a grant under this section 
        unless the project will benefit--
                    (A) at least 26 States;
                    (B) a majority of the States in a region of 
                the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; or
                    (C) a regional association of State fish 
                and game departments.
            (2) Use of submitted priority list of projects.--
        The Secretary of the Interior may award grants under 
        this section only for projects identified on a priority 
        list of wildlife restoration projects described in 
        paragraph (3).
            (3) Priority list of projects.--A priority list 
        referred to in paragraph (2) is a priority list of 
        projects that the International Association of Fish and 
        Wildlife Agencies--
                    (A) prepares through a committee comprised 
                of the heads of State fish and game departments 
                (or their designees), in consultation with--
                            (i) nongovernmental organizations 
                        that represent conservation 
                        organizations;
                            (ii) sportsmen organizations; and
                            (iii) industries that support or 
                        promote hunting, trapping, recreational 
                        shooting, bow hunting, or archery;
                    (B) approves by vote of a majority of the 
                heads of State fish and game departments (or 
                their designees); and
                    (C) not later than October 1 of each fiscal 
                year, submits to the Chief of the Division of 
                Federal Aid.
            (4) Publication.--The Chief of the Division of 
        Federal Aid shall publish in the Federal Register each 
        priority list submitted under paragraph (3)(C).
    (c) Eligible Grantees.--
            (1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior may 
        make a grant under this section only to--
                    (A) a State or group of States;
                    (B) the United States Fish and Wildlife 
                Service for the purpose of carrying out the 
                National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and 
                Wildlife-Associated Recreation; and
                    (C) subject to paragraph (2), a 
                nongovernmental organization.
            (2) Nongovernmental organizations.--
                    (A) In general.--Any nongovernmental 
                organization that applies for a grant under 
                this section shall submit with the application 
                to the International Association of Fish and 
                Wildlife Agencies a certification that the 
                organization--
                            (i) does not promote or encourage 
                        opposition to the regulated hunting or 
                        trapping of wildlife; and
                            (ii) will use any funds awarded 
                        under this section in compliance with 
                        subsection (d).
                    (B) Penalties for certain activities.--Any 
                nongovernmental organization that is found to 
                promote or encourage opposition to the 
                regulated hunting or trapping of wildlife or 
                that does not use funds in compliance with 
                subsection (d) shall return all funds received 
                under this section and be subject to any other 
                penalties under law.
    (d) Use of Grants.--A grant under this section shall not be 
used for an activity, project, or program that promotes or 
encourages opposition to the regulated hunting or trapping of 
wildlife.
    Sec. [10] 12. The Secretary of Agriculture \1\ is 
authorized to make rules and regulations for carrying out the 
provisions of this Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Reorganization Plan No. II of 1939, transferred functions of 
the Secretary of Agriculture relating to conservation of wildlife, 
game, and migratory birds to the Secretary of the Interior.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

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


                         ACT OF AUGUST 9, 1950

                  (Chapter 658; 64 Stat. 430 et seq.)

 (Popularly known as the ``Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Act'', the 
  ``Fish Restoration and Management Projects Act'', and the ``Dingell-
                 Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act'')

 AN ACT To provide that the United States shall aid the States in fish 
      restoration and management projects, and for other purposes.



           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
    Sec. 4. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [(d) Of the balance of each such annual appropriation 
remaining after the distribution and use under subsections (a), 
(b), and (c), respectively, so much, not to exceed 6 per centum 
of such balance, as the Secretary of the Interior may estimate 
to be necessary for his or her expenses in the conduct of 
necessary investigations, administration, and the execution of 
this Act, for an outreach and communications program and for 
aiding in the formulation, adoption, or administration of any 
compact between two or more States for the conservation and 
management of migratory fishes in marine or freshwaters, shall 
be deducted for that purpose, and such sum is authorized to be 
made available until the expiration of the next succeeding 
fiscal year. Of the sum available to the Secretary of the 
Interior under this subsection for any fiscal year, up to 
$2,500,000 may be used for the National Outreach and 
Communications program under section 8(d) in addition to the 
amount available for that program under subsection (c). No 
funds available to the Secretary under this subsection may be 
used to replace funding traditionally provided through general 
appropriations, nor for any purposes except those purposes 
authorized by this Act. The Secretary shall publish a detailed 
accounting of the projects, programs, and activities funded 
under this subsection annually in the Federal Register.]
    (d) Set-Aside for Administrative Expenses.--
            (1) In general.--
                    (A) Set-aside.--For fiscal year 2001 and 
                each fiscal year thereafter, of the balance of 
                each such annual appropriation remaining after 
                the distribution and use under subsections (a), 
                (b), and (c) and section 14, the Secretary of 
                the Interior may use not more than the 
                available amount specified in subparagraph (B) 
                for the fiscal year for administrative expenses 
                incurred in implementation of this Act, in 
                accordance with this subsection and section 9.
                    (B) Available amounts.--The available 
                amount referred to in subparagraph (A) is--
                            (i) for fiscal year 2001, 
                        $9,500,000; and
                            (ii) for fiscal year 2002 and each 
                        fiscal year thereafter, the sum of--
                                    (I) the available amount 
                                for the preceding fiscal year; 
                                and
                                    (II) the amount determined 
                                by multiplying--
                                            (aa) the available 
                                        amount for the 
                                        preceding fiscal year; 
                                        and
                                            (bb) the change, 
                                        relative to the 
                                        preceding fiscal year, 
                                        in the Consumer Price 
                                        Index for All Urban 
                                        Consumers published by 
                                        the Department of 
                                        Labor.
            (2) Period of availability; apportionment of 
        unobligated amounts.--
                    (A) Period of availability.--For each 
                fiscal year, the available amount under 
                paragraph (1) shall remain available for 
                obligation for use under that paragraph until 
                the end of the fiscal year.
                    (B) Apportionment of unobligated amounts.--
                Not later than 60 days after the end of a 
                fiscal year, the Secretary of the Interior 
                shall apportion among the States any of the 
                available amount under paragraph (1) that 
                remains unobligated at the end of the fiscal 
                year, on the same basis and in the same manner 
                as other amounts made available under this Act 
                are apportioned among the States under 
                subsection (e) for the fiscal year.
    (e) The Secretary of the Interior, after the distribution, 
transfer, use, and deduction under subsections (a), (b), (c), 
and (d), respectively and after deducting amounts used for 
grants under section 14, shall apportion the remainder of each 
such annual appropriation among the several States in the 
following manner: 40 per centum in the ratio which the area of 
each State including coastal and Great Lakes waters (as 
determined by the Secretary of the Interior) bears to the total 
area of all the States, and 60 per centum in the ratio which 
the number of persons holding paid licenses to fish for sport 
or recreation in the State in the second fiscal year preceding 
the fiscal year for which such apportionment is made, as 
certified to said Secretary by the State fish and game 
departments, bears to the number of such persons in all the 
States. Such apportionments shall be adjusted equitably so that 
no State shall receive less than 1 per centum nor more than 5 
per centum of the total amount apportioned. Where the 
apportionment to any State under this section is less than 
$4,500 annually, the Secretary of the Interior may allocate not 
more than $4,500 of said appropriation to said State to carry 
out the purposes of this Act when said State certifies to the 
Secretary of the Interior that it has set aside not less than 
$1,500 from its fish-and-game funds or has made, through its 
legislature, an appropriation in this amount for said purposes.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [Sec. 9. Out of the deductions set aside for administering 
and executing this Act the Secretary of the Interior is 
authorized to employ such assistants, clerks, and other persons 
in the District of Columbia and elsewhere, to be taken from the 
eligible lists of the civil service; to rent or construct 
buildings outside of the District of Columbia; to purchase such 
supplies, materials, equipment, office fixtures, and apparatus; 
and to incur such travel and other expenses, including 
publication of technical and administrative reports, purchase, 
maintenance, and hire of passenger-carrying motor vehicles, as 
he may deem necessary for carrying out the provisions of this 
Act.]
SEC. 9. REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS CONCERNING USE OF AMOUNTS FOR 
        ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.
    (a) Authorized Administrative Costs.--Except as provided in 
subsection (b), the Secretary of the Interior may use available 
amounts under section 4(d) only for administrative expenses 
that directly support the implementation of this Act, 
consisting of--
            (1) personnel costs of employees who directly 
        administer this Act on a full-time basis;
            (2) personnel costs of employees who directly 
        administer this Act on a part-time basis for at least 
        20 hours each week, not to exceed the portion of those 
        costs incurred with respect to the work hours of an 
        employee during which the employee directly administers 
        this Act, as those hours are certified by the 
        supervisor of the employee;
            (3) support costs directly associated with 
        personnel costs authorized under paragraphs (1) and 
        (2), excluding costs associated with staffing and 
        operation of regional offices of the United States Fish 
        and Wildlife Service and the Department of the Interior 
        other than for the purposes of this Act;
            (4) costs of determining under section 6(a) whether 
        State comprehensive plans and projects are substantial 
        in character and design;
            (5) overhead costs, including the costs of general 
        administrative services, that are directly attributable 
        to administration of this Act and are based on--
                    (A) actual costs, as determined by a direct 
                cost allocation methodology approved by the 
                Director of the Office of Management and Budget 
                for use by Federal agencies; and
                    (B) in the case of costs that are not 
                determinable under subparagraph (A), an amount 
                per full-time equivalent employee authorized 
                under paragraphs (1) and (2) that does not 
                exceed the amount charged or assessed for costs 
                per full-time equivalent employee for any other 
                division or program of the United States Fish 
                and Wildlife Service;
            (6) costs incurred in auditing, every 5 years, the 
        wildlife and sport fish activities of each State fish 
        and game department and the use of funds under section 
        6 by each State fish and game department;
            (7) costs of audits under subsection (d);
            (8) costs of necessary training of Federal and 
        State full-time personnel who administer this Act to 
        improve administration of this Act;
            (9) costs of travel to States, territories, and 
        Canada by personnel who--
                    (A) administer this Act on a full-time 
                basis for purposes directly related to 
                administration of State programs or projects; 
                or
                    (B) administer grants under section 6 or 
                14;
            (10) costs of travel by personnel outside the 
        United States (except travel to Canada) that relates 
        directly to administration of this Act and that is 
        approved directly by the Assistant Secretary for Fish 
        and Wildlife and Parks;
            (11) relocation expenses for personnel who, after 
        relocation, will administer this Act on a full-time 
        basis for at least 1 year, as certified by the Director 
        of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service at the 
        time at which the relocation expenses are incurred; and
            (12) costs to audit, evaluate, approve, disapprove, 
        and advise concerning grants under section 6 or 14.
    (b) Reporting of Other Uses.--If the Secretary of the 
Interior determines that available amounts under section 4(d) 
should be used for an administrative expense other than an 
administrative expense described in subsection (a), the 
Secretary--
            (1) shall submit to the Committee on Environment 
        and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on 
        Resources of the House of Representatives a report 
        describing the administrative expense; and
            (2) may use any such available amounts for the 
        administrative expense only after the end of the 30-day 
        period beginning on the date of submission of the 
        report under paragraph (1).
    (c) Restriction on Use To Supplement General 
Appropriations.--The Secretary of the Interior shall not use 
available amounts under section 4(d) to supplement the funding 
of any function for which general appropriations are made for 
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service or any other entity 
of the Department of the Interior.
    (d) Audit Requirement.--
            (1) In general.--The Inspector General of the 
        Department of the Interior shall procure the 
        performance of biennial audits, in accordance with 
        generally accepted accounting principles, of 
        expenditures and obligations of amounts used by the 
        Secretary of the Interior for administrative expenses 
        incurred in implementation of this Act.
            (2) Auditor.--
                    (A) In general.--An audit under this 
                subsection shall be performed under a contract 
                that is awarded under competitive procedures 
                (as defined in section 4 of the Office of 
                Federal Procurement Policy Act (41 U.S.C. 403)) 
                by a person or entity that is not associated in 
                any way with the Department of the Interior 
                (except by way of a contract for the 
                performance of an audit).
                    (B) Supervision of auditor.--The auditor 
                selected under subparagraph (A) shall report 
                to, and be supervised by, the Inspector General 
                of the Department of the Interior, except that 
                the auditor shall submit a copy of the biennial 
                audit findings to the Secretary of the Interior 
                at the time at which the findings are submitted 
                to the Inspector General of the Department of 
                the Interior.
            (3) Report to congress.--The Inspector General of 
        the Department of the Interior shall promptly report to 
        the Committee on Resources of the House of 
        Representatives and the Committee on Environment and 
        Public Works of the Senate on the results of each audit 
        under this subsection.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [Sec. 13. The effective date of this Act shall be July 1, 
1950.]
SEC. 14. MULTISTATE CONSERVATION GRANT PROGRAM.
    (a) In General.--
            (1) Amount for grants.--Of the balance of each 
        annual appropriation made under section 3 remaining 
        after the distribution and use under subsections (a), 
        (b), and (c) of section 4 in a fiscal year, not more 
        than $3,500,000 shall be available to the Secretary of 
        the Interior for making multistate conservation project 
        grants in accordance with this section.
            (2) Period of availability; apportionment.--
                    (A) Period of availability.--A grant under 
                this subsection shall remain available only for 
                the fiscal year for which the grant is made and 
                the following fiscal year.
                    (B) Apportionment.--At the end of the 
                period of availability under subparagraph (A), 
                the Secretary of the Interior shall apportion 
                any grant funds that remain available among the 
                States in the manner specified in section 4(e) 
                for use by the States in the same manner as 
                funds apportioned under section 4(e).
    (b) Selection of Projects.--
            (1) States or entities to be benefited.--A project 
        shall not be eligible for a grant under this section 
        unless the project will benefit--
                    (A) at least 26 States;
                    (B) a majority of the States in a region of 
                the United States Fish and Wildlife Service; or
                    (C) a regional association of State fish 
                and game departments.
            (2) Use of submitted priority list of projects.--
        The Secretary of the Interior may award grants under 
        this section only for projects identified on a priority 
        list of sport fish restoration projects described in 
        paragraph (3).
            (3) Priority list of projects.--A priority list 
        referred to in paragraph (2) is a priority list of 
        projects that the International Association of Fish and 
        Wildlife Agencies--
                    (A) prepares through a committee comprised 
                of the heads of State fish and game departments 
                (or their designees), in consultation with--
                            (i) nongovernmental organizations 
                        that represent conservation 
                        organizations;
                            (ii) sportsmen organizations; and
                            (iii) industries that fund the 
                        sport fish restoration programs under 
                        this Act;
                    (B) approves by vote of a majority of the 
                heads of State fish and game departments (or 
                their designees); and
                    (C) not later than October 1 of each fiscal 
                year, submits to the Chief of the Division of 
                Federal Aid.
            (4) Publication.--The Chief of the Division of 
        Federal Aid shall publish in the Federal Register each 
        priority list submitted under paragraph (3)(C).
    (c) Eligible Grantees.--
            (1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior may 
        make a grant under this section only to--
                    (A) a State or group of States;
                    (B) the United States Fish and Wildlife 
                Service for the purpose of carrying out the 
                National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and 
                Wildlife-Associated Recreation; and
                    (C) subject to paragraph (2), a 
                nongovernmental organization.
            (2) Nongovernmental organizations.--
                    (A) In general.--Any nongovernmental 
                organization that applies for a grant under 
                this section shall submit with the application 
                to the International Association of Fish and 
                Wildlife Agencies a certification that the 
                organization--
                            (i) does not promote or encourage 
                        opposition to the regulated taking of 
                        fish; and
                            (ii) will use any funds awarded 
                        under this section in compliance with 
                        subsection (d).
                    (B) Penalties for certain activities.--Any 
                nongovernmental organization that is found to 
                promote or encourage opposition to the 
                regulated taking of fish or that does not use 
                funds in compliance with subsection (d) shall 
                return all funds received under this section 
                and be subject to any other penalties under 
                law.
    (d) Use of Grants.--A grant under this section shall not be 
used for an activity, project, or program that promotes or 
encourages opposition to the regulated taking of fish.
    (e) Funding for Other Activities.--Of the balance of each 
annual appropriation made under section 3 remaining after the 
distribution and use under subsections (a), (b), and (c) of 
section 4 for each fiscal year and after deducting amounts used 
for grants under subsection (a), $2,100,000 shall be made 
available for--
            (1) the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries 
        Commission;
            (2) the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission;
            (3) the Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission;
            (4) the Great Lakes Fisheries Commission;
            (5) the Sport Fishing and Boating Partnership 
        Council established by the United States Fish and 
        Wildlife Service;
            (6) construction and renovation of pumpout stations 
        and waste reception facilities under the Clean Vessel 
        Act of 1992 (33 U.S.C. 1322 note; subtitle F of title V 
        of Public Law 102-587);
            (7) coastal wetlands conservation grants under 
        section 305 of the Coastal Wetlands Planning, 
        Protection and Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 3954);
            (8) boating infrastructure grants under section 
        7404 of the Sportfishing and Boating Safety Act of 1998 
        (16 U.S.C. 777g-1); and
            (9) the National Outreach and Communications 
        Program established under section 8(d).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                              ----------                              


TITLE 26--U.S. CODE--INTERNAL REVENUE CODE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 9504. Aquatic Resources Trust Fund
    (a) Creation of Trust Fund--
    (1) In general.--There is hereby established in the 
Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the 
``Aquatic Resources Trust Fund''.
    (2) Accounts in Trust Fund The Aquatic Resources Trust Fund 
shall consist of--
            (A) a Sport Fish Restoration Account, and
            (B) a Boat Safety Account.
    Each such Account shall consist of such amounts as may be 
appropriated, credited, or paid to it as provided in this 
section, section 9503(c)(4), section 9503(c)(5), or section 
9602(b).
    (b) Sport Fish Restoration Account--
    (1) Transfer of certain taxes to account.--There is hereby 
appropriated to the Sport Fish Restoration Account amounts 
equivalent to the following amounts received in the Treasury on 
or after October 1, 1984--
            (A) the taxes imposed by section 4161(a) (relating 
        to sport fishing equipment), and
            (B) the import duties imposed on fishing tackle 
        under heading 9507 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of 
        the United States (19 U.S.C. 1202) and on yachts and 
        pleasure craft under chapter 89 of the Harmonized 
        Tariff Schedule of the United States.
    (2) Expenditures from account.--Amounts in the Sport Fish 
Restoration Account shall be available, as provided by 
appropriation Acts, for making expenditures--
            (A) to carry out the purposes of the Act entitled 
        ''An Act to provide that the United States shall aid 
        the States in fish restoration and management projects, 
        and for other purposes'', approved August 9, 1950 [(as 
        in effect on the date of the enactment of the TEA 21 
        Restoration Act)] (as in effect on the date of 
        enactment of the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration 
        Programs Improvement Act of 2000),
            (B) to carry out the purposes of section 7404(d) of 
        the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (as 
        in effect on the date of the enactment of the TEA 21 
        Restoration Act), and
            (C) to carry out the purposes of the Coastal 
        Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (as 
        in effect on the date of the enactment of the TEA 21 
        Restoration Act).
    Amounts transferred to such account under section 
9503(c)(5) may be used only for making expenditures described 
in subparagraph (B) of this paragraph.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *