Report text available as:

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

108th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    108-235

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



 
DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2004

 July 24, 2003.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                    ADDITIONAL AND DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 2861]

    The Committee on Appropriations submits the following 
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making 
appropriations for the Departments of Veterans Affairs and 
Housing and Urban Development, and for sundry independent 
agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, and offices for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2004, and for other 
purposes.

                        INDEX TO BILL AND REPORT

                                                            Page number

                                                            Bill Report
Title I--Department of Veterans Affairs....................     2
                                                                      3
Title II--Department of Housing and Urban Development......    23
                                                                     21
Title III--Independent Agencies............................    69
                                                                     82
        American Battle Monuments Commission...............    69
                                                                     82
        Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.....    70
                                                                     83
        Community Development Financial Institutions.......    71
                                                                     84
        Consumer Product Safety Commission.................    72
                                                                     85
        Corporation for National and Community Service.....    72
                                                                     85
        U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims..........    76
                                                                     89
        Department of Defense--Civil, Cemeterial Expenses, 
            Army...........................................    77
                                                                     89
        National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences    77
                                                                     90
        Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry...    78
                                                                     90
        Environmental Protection Agency....................    79
                                                                     91
        Office of Science and Technology Policy............    88
                                                                    128
        Council on Environmental Quality and Office of 
            Environmental Quality..........................    88
                                                                    128
        Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation..............    89
                                                                    129
        Federal Citizen Information Center.................    89
                                                                    129
        National Aeronautics and Space Administration......    90
                                                                    130
        National Credit Union Administration...............    94
                                                                    140
        National Science Foundation........................    95
                                                                    141
        Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation..............    98
                                                                    147
        Selective Service System...........................    99
                                                                    147
Title IV--General Provisions...............................    99
                                                                    148

                          Summary of the Bill

    The Committee recommends $122,740,148,000 in new budget 
(obligational) authority for the Departments of Veterans 
Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and 19 independent 
agencies and offices.
    The following table summarizes the amounts recommended in 
the bill in comparison with the appropriations for fiscal year 
2003 and budget estimates for fiscal year 2004.

              Operating Plan and Reprogramming Procedures

    The Committee continues to have a particular interest in 
being informed of reprogrammings which, although they may not 
change either the total amount available in an account or any 
of the purposes for which the appropriation is legally 
available, represent a significant departure from budget plans 
presented to the Committee in an agency's budget 
justifications, the basis of this appropriations Act.
    Consequently, the Committee directs the Departments, 
agencies, boards, commissions, corporations and offices funded 
at or in excess of $100,000,000 in this bill, to consult with 
the Committee prior to each change from the approved budget 
levels in excess of $500,000 between programs, activities, 
object classifications or elements unless otherwise provided 
for in the Committee report accompanying this bill. For 
agencies, boards, commissions, corporations and offices funded 
at less than $100,000,000 in this bill, the reprogramming 
threshold shall be $250,000 between programs, activities, 
object classifications or elements unless otherwise provided 
for in the Committee report accompanying this bill. 
Additionally, the Committee expects to be promptly notified of 
all reprogramming actions which involve less than the above-
mentioned amounts. If such actions would have the effect of 
significantly changing an agency's funding requirements in 
future years, or if programs or projects specifically cited in 
the Committee's reports are affected by the reprogramming, the 
reprogramming must be approved by the Committee regardless of 
the amount proposed to be moved. Furthermore, the Committee 
wishes to be consulted regarding reorganizations of offices, 
programs, and activities prior to the planned implementation of 
such reorganizations.
    The Committee also directs that the Departments of Veterans 
Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, as well as the 
Corporation for National and Community Service, the 
Environmental Protection Agency, the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration, the National Science Foundation, the 
Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Chemical Safety and 
Hazard Investigation Board shall submit operating plans, signed 
by the respective secretary, administrator, or agency head, for 
the Committee's review within 120 days of the bill's enactment.

                    RELATIONSHIP WITH BUDGET OFFICES

    Through the years, the Committee has channeled most of its 
inquiries and requests for information and assistance through 
the budget offices of the various departments, agencies, and 
commissions. The Committee has often pointed to the natural 
affinity and relationship between these organizations and the 
Committee which makes such a relationship workable. The 
Committee reiterates its longstanding position that while the 
Committee reserves the right to call upon all offices in the 
departments, agencies, and commissions, the primary conjunction 
between the Committee and these entities must normally be 
through the budget offices. The Committee appreciates all the 
assistance received from each of the departments, agencies, and 
commissions during the past year. The workload generated by the 
budget process is large and growing, and therefore, a positive, 
responsive relationship between the Committee and the budget 
offices is absolutely essential to the appropriations process.

                                TITLE I


                     DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS





Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................   $60,720,955,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................  \1\ 58,100,432,0
                                                                      00
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................    60,718,865,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........    +2,620,523,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       +2,090,000

\1\ Includes supplemental funding of $100,000,000 for General operating
  expenses.

    The Department of Veterans Affairs is one of the largest 
Federal agencies in terms of employment with an average 
employment of approximately 211,000. It administers benefits 
for more than 25,500,000 veterans, and 39,100,000 family 
members of living veterans and survivors of deceased veterans. 
Thus, close to 65,200,000 people, comprising about 22.2 percent 
of the total population of the United States, are potential 
recipients of veterans benefits provided by the Federal 
Government.
    A total of $60,720,955,000 in new budget authority is 
recommended by the Committee for the Department of Veterans 
Affairs programs in fiscal year 2004. The funds recommended 
provide for compensation payments to 2,860,347 veterans and 
survivors of deceased veterans with service-connected 
disabilities; pension payment for 553,553 non-service-connected 
disabled veterans, widows and children in need of financial 
assistance; education training, tuition assistance, and 
vocational assistance of 640,277 veterans, servicepersons, and 
reservists, and 59,128 eligible dependents of deceased veterans 
or seriously disabled veterans; housing credit assistance in 
the form of 270,000 guaranteed loans provided to veterans and 
servicepersons; administration or supervision of life insurance 
programs with 4,110,960 policies for veterans and active duty 
servicepersons providing coverage of $703,970,770,000; 
inpatient care and treatment of beneficiaries in 162 hospitals; 
43 domiciliaries, 137 nursing homes and 864 outpatient clinics 
which includes independent, satellite, community-based, and 
rural outreach clinics involving 56,121,000 visits; and the 
administration of the National Cemetery Administration for 
burial of eligible veterans, servicepersons and their 
survivors.
    The Department of Veterans Affairs submitted the 2004 
budget in an alternative appropriations structure for 
consideration. The Committee did not suggest this budget 
restructuring and has appropriated funds for fiscal year 2004 
using the standard appropriations structure. The Committee 
directs that should the Department decide to propose budget 
restructuring again, the Department must first submit a 
complete budget justification, complete with the traditional 
appropriations account structure with detailed information on 
the prior year, current year, and requested funding levels for 
each program, project, or activity funded within each account, 
and include a detailed narrative description of the proposed 
changes requested. A proposed restructured budget may also be 
submitted for Committee consideration at the same time, but not 
in lieu of, the appropriations structure contained in this 
report. The Committee reiterates that object classification 
displays are supplements, not substitutes, for detailed 
displays which funding for each program, project, or activity 
within each account. Further, the Committee directs the 
Department to refrain from incorporating ``performance-based'' 
budget documents in the 2005 budget justification submitted to 
the Committee, but keep the Performance Plan as a separate 
volume.

                    Veterans Benefits Administration


               Compensation, Pension and Burial Benefits


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................   $29,845,127,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................    28,949,000,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................    28,845,127,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........      +896,127,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    This appropriation provides funds for service-connected 
compensation payments to an estimated 2,860,347 beneficiaries 
and pension payments to another 553,553 beneficiaries with non-
service-connected disabilities. The average cost per 
compensation case in 2004 is estimated at $9,401, and pension 
payments are projected at a unit cost of $6,096. The estimated 
caseload and cost by program for 2003 and 2004 are included in 
the budget justification materials.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee is recommending the 
budget estimate of $29,845,127,000 for compensation, pension 
and burial benefits. The bill also includes requested language 
not to exceed $17,617,000 of reimbursements of which $8,527,000 
goes to the general operating expenses account and $9,090,000 
to the medical services for priority 1-6 veterans account for 
administrative expenses of implementing cost saving provisions 
required by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, 
Public Law 101-508, the Veterans' Benefits Act of 1992, Public 
Law 102-568, and the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 
1994, Public Law 103-446. These cost savings provisions include 
verifying pension income against Internal Revenue Service and 
Social Security Administration (SSA) data; establishing a match 
with the SSA to obtain verification of Social Security numbers; 
and the $90 monthly VA pension cap for Medicaid-eligible single 
veterans and surviving spouses alone in Medicaid-covered 
nursing homes. The bill includes requested language permitting 
this appropriation to reimburse such sums as may be earned to 
the medical facilities revolving fund to help defray the 
operating expenses of individual medical facilities for nursing 
home care provided to pensioners.
    The Administration has proposed to provide a cost-of-living 
adjustment, based on the change in the Consumer Price Index, to 
all compensation beneficiaries, including dependency and 
indemnity compensation (DIC) for spouses and children. It is 
currently estimated at 2.0 percent. This is the same as the 
COLA that will be provided, under current law, to veterans 
pension and Social Security recipients. The increase would be 
effective December 1, 2003, and would cost an estimated 
$355,150,000 during 2004. Funding for this COLA is reflected in 
the Compensation, Pensions and Burial Benefits obligations in 
the 2004 budget.
    The Administration has proposed language that would provide 
indefinite 2004 supplemental appropriations for compensation 
and pension payments. The Committee believes the current 
funding procedures are adequate and has not included the 
requested language in the bill.

                         Readjustment Benefits





Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $2,529,734,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     2,264,808,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     2,529,734,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........      +264,926,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    This appropriation finances the education and training of 
veterans and servicepersons whose initial entry on active duty 
took place on or after July 1, 1985. These benefits are 
included in the All-Volunteer Force Educational Assistance 
Program. Eligibility to receive this assistance began in 1987. 
Basic benefits are funded through appropriations made to the 
readjustment benefits appropriation and transfers from the 
Department of Defense. Supplemental benefits are also provided 
to certain veterans through education assistance to certain 
members of the Selected Reserve and are funded through 
transfers from the Departments of Defense and Homeland 
Security. In addition, certain disabled veterans are provided 
with vocational rehabilitation, specially adapted housing 
grants, and automobile grants with approved adaptive equipment. 
This account also finances educational assistance allowances 
for eligible dependents of those veterans who died from 
service-connected causes or have a total and permanent service-
connected disability as well as dependents of servicepersons 
who were captured or missing-in-action.
    The Committee recommends the budget estimates of 
$2,529,734,000 for readjustment benefits in fiscal year 2004, 
an increase of $264,926,000 over the current year funding 
level.
    The Administration has proposed language that would provide 
indefinite 2004 supplemental appropriations for readjustment 
benefits because of legislative changes or year-end funding 
shortages. The Committee believes the current funding 
procedures are adequate and has not included the requested 
language in the bill.

                   VETERANS INSURANCE AND INDEMNITIES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $29,017,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        27,530,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        29,017,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        +1,487,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    The veterans insurance and indemnities appropriation is 
made up of the former appropriations for military and naval 
insurance, applicable to World War I veterans; national service 
life insurance (NSLI), applicable to certain World War II 
veterans; servicemen's indemnities, applicable to Korean 
conflict veterans; and the veterans mortgage life insurance, 
applicable to individuals who have received a grant for 
specially adapted housing.
    The budget estimate of $29,017,000 for veterans insurance 
and indemnities in fiscal year 2004 is included in the bill, an 
increase of $1,487,000 over the current year funding level. The 
amount provided will enable VA to transfer more than 
$21,167,000 to the service-disabled veterans insurance fund and 
transfer $6,500,000 in payments for the 2,810 policies under 
the veterans mortgage life insurance program. These policies 
are identified under the veterans' insurance and indemnity 
appropriation since they provide insurance to service-disabled 
veterans unable to qualify under basic NSLI.
    The Administration has proposed language that would provide 
indefinite 2004 supplemental appropriations for the insurance 
program. The Committee believes the current funding procedures 
are adequate and has not included the requested language in the 
bill.

         VETERANS HOUSING BENEFIT PROGRAM FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Limitation on
                                                                              direct loans for
                                                             Program account      specially      Administrative
                                                                               adapted housing      expenses
                                                                                    loans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 recommendation...........................      $305,834,000          $300,000      $154,850,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation............................       437,522,000           300,000       167,114,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request...........................       305,834,000           300,000       154,850,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation............      -131,688,000                 0       -12,264,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request...........                 0                 0                 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The purpose of the VA home loan guaranty program is to 
facilitate the extension of mortgage credit on favorable terms 
by private lenders to eligible veterans. This appropriation 
provides for all costs, with the exception of the native 
American veterans housing loan program, of the Department's 
direct and guaranteed loans programs. The Federal Credit Reform 
Act of 1990 requires budgetary resources to be available prior 
to incurring a direct loan obligation or a loan guarantee 
commitment. In addition, the Act requires all administrative 
expenses of a direct or guaranteed loan program to be funded 
through a program account.
    VA loan guaranties are made to servicemembers, veterans, 
reservists and unremarried surviving spouses for the purchase 
of homes, condominiums, manufactured homes and for refinancing 
loans. The Department guarantees part of the total loan, 
permitting the purchaser to obtain a mortgage with a 
competitive interest rate, even without a down payment if the 
lender agrees. The Department requires that a down payment be 
made for a manufactured home. With a Department guaranty, the 
lender is protected against loss up to the amount of the 
guaranty if the borrower fails to repay the loan.
    The Committee recommends such sums as may be necessary 
(estimated to total $305,834,000) for funding subsidy payments, 
$300,000 for the limitation on direct loans for specially 
adapted housing loans, and $154,850,000 for administrative 
expenses which is the budget request. The appropriation for 
administrative expenses may be transferred to and merged with 
the General Operating Expenses account.

                  EDUCATION LOAN FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Limitation
                                  Program     on direct   Administrative
                                  account       loans        expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004                     $1,000       $3,400        $70,000
 recommendation...............
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation        1,000        3,400         70,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget               1,000        3,400              0
 request......................
Comparison with fiscal year               0            0              0
 2003 appropriation...........
Comparison with fiscal year               0            0        +70,000
 2004 budget request..........
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This appropriation covers the cost of direct loans for 
eligible dependents and, in addition, it includes 
administrative expenses necessary to carry out the direct loan 
program. The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 requires 
budgetary resources to be available prior to incurring a direct 
loan obligation. In addition, the Act requires all 
administrative expenses of a direct loan program to be funded 
through a program account.
    The bill includes the budget requests of $1,000 for funding 
subsidy program costs, $3,400 as the limitation on direct 
loans, and $70,000 for administrative expenses. The 
appropriation for administrative expenses may be transferred to 
and merged with the General Operating Expenses account.

            VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION LOANS PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Limitation
                                  Program     on direct   Administrative
                                  account       loans        expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004                    $52,000   $3,938,000       $300,000
 recommendation...............
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation       55,000    3,626,000        287,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget              52,000    3,938,000        300,000
 request......................
Comparison with fiscal year          -3,000     +312,000        +13,000
 2003 appropriation...........
Comparison with fiscal year               0            0              0
 2004 budget request..........
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This appropriation covers the funding subsidy cost of 
direct loans for vocational rehabilitation of eligible veterans 
and, in addition, it includes administrative expenses necessary 
to carry out the direct loan program. Loans of up to $896 
(based on indexed chapter 31 subsistence allowance rate) are 
available to service-connected disabled veterans enrolled in 
vocational rehabilitation programs when the veteran is 
temporarily in need of additional assistance. Repayment is made 
in 10 monthly installments, without interest, through 
deductions from future payments of compensation, pension, 
subsistence allowance, educational assistance allowance, or 
retirement pay. The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 requires 
budgetary resources to be available prior to incurring a direct 
loan obligation. In addition, the Act requires all 
administrative expenses of a direct loan program to be funded 
through a program account.
    The bill includes the budget requests of $52,000 for 
funding subsidy program costs and $300,000 for administrative 
expenses. The administrative expenses may be transferred to and 
merged with the General Operating Expenses account.
    In addition, the bill includes requested language limiting 
program direct loans to $3,938,000. It is estimated that VA 
will make 4,845 loans in fiscal year 2004, with an average 
amount of $813.

          NATIVE AMERICAN VETERAN HOUSING LOAN PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Administrative expenses:
Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................          $571,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................           554,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................           571,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........           +17,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    This program tests the feasibility of authorizing VA to 
make direct home loans to Native American veterans who live on 
U.S. trust land. This is a pilot program which began in 1993 
and expires on December 31, 2005. The bill includes the budget 
request of $571,000 for administration expenses, which may be 
transferred to and merged with the General Operating Expenses 
account.

  GUARANTEED TRANSITIONAL HOUSING LOANS FOR HOMELESS VETERANS PROGRAM 
                                ACCOUNT

    Public Law 105-368, the Veterans Programs Enhancement Act 
of 1998, established this program. All funds authorized for 
this program were appropriated in fiscal year 2000. Therefore, 
no appropriation request has been included for fiscal year 
2004. Bill language is included allowing the use of funds in 
Medical Services for Priority 1-6 Veterans and General 
Operating Expenses to administer this program.
    The Committee is concerned about the activities in this 
program. The program status report submitted as requested the 
fiscal year 2003 statement of managers did not describe a truly 
successful program. The Committee has received inquiries from 
potential participants of the program seeking to earmark 
section 8 funds under the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development in addition to a guaranteed transitional home loan. 
The Committee views the financing of one Federal loan program 
by the subsidy provided in another Federal program to be 
contrary to the intent of creating the guaranteed transitional 
home loan program in VA. Therefore, the Committee has limited 
the administration expenses of this program to $350,000 in 
fiscal year 2004.

                     Veterans Health Administration


                              MEDICAL CARE




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.....................                  $0
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation......................      23,889,304,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.....................      25,218,080,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation......     -23,889,304,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.....     -25,218,080,000


    The Department of Veterans Affairs operates the largest 
Federal medical care delivery system in the country, with 172 
medical centers, 43 domiciliaries, 137 nursing homes, and 864 
outpatient clinics which includes independent, satellite, 
community-based, and rural outreach clinics.
    The Committee does not recommend funds for this account in 
2004, and instead recommends an alternative account structure 
for the Veterans Health Administration, which will provide a 
better accounting of appropriated and receipt funds and will 
lead to better oversight of the costs and expenditures of VHA. 
As of 2003, the Committee and the Congress have provided a 38% 
increase in funding for medical care since 1999, and still 
there are stories of waiting lists and a lack of health care in 
some parts of the country. Even worse, the VA reports that 
priority 1-6 veterans, the core mission and patient population 
of the VA, those veterans that the VA was created to serve, are 
not getting care in a timely manner. The Committee places these 
veterans as the priority and need to ensure their timely access 
to health care.
    In addition to concerns about availability of care, the 
Committee is interested in the capital asset costs of the VA. 
The Department is on the verge of making decisions related to 
results achieved in the CARES study and the Committee needs a 
full accounting of exactly how much VA is currently spending on 
capital infrastructure and how much could be saved and instead 
invested in medical services by realigning VA facilities. GAO 
estimated that VA was spending $1 of every $4 dollars on 
capital assets.
    Another component of the old medical care account is the 
cost associated with administration of the health care system. 
While the Medical Administration and Miscellaneous Operating 
Expenses account captured the costs associated with the 
operation of the headquarters administration, there was no 
clear way to account for information technology initiatives or 
administration costs in the VISNs, the facilities, and the 
various administration centers across the country or the costs 
associated with legal services and billing offices. The 
Committee views some administration costs as necessary to 
operate the system, but not actual medical services.
    To address these concerns, the Committee recommends the 
creation of four new accounts in VHA, and retaining the Medical 
and Prosthetic Research account. The Committee has created 
separate accounts to provide funding specifically for medical 
services for priority 1-6 veterans (which includes mandated 
care for non-veterans such as CHAMPVA beneficiaries), medical 
services for priority 7-8 veterans, medical administration, and 
medical facilities. The Committee directs VA to start planning 
for the new account structure immediately for implementation 
beginning in fiscal year 2004 and to submit the fiscal year 
2005 budget justification using the format created below. In 
order to track costs, the Committee suggests that VHA should 
standardize and require system utilization of the DSS system, 
created and implemented using hundreds of millions of medical 
care funds, across all VISNs and use that system as the cost 
accounting tool was meant to be. Further, the Committee 
recommends transferring receipts from the Medical Care 
Collection Fund into the Medical Services for Priority 7-8 
Veterans account.

               MEDICAL SERVICES FOR PRIORITY 1-6 VETERANS




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.....................     $15,779,220,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation......................                   0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.....................                   0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation......     +15,779,220,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.....     +15,779,220,000


    This Medical Services for Priority 1-6 Veterans 
appropriation provides for medical services of eligible 
veterans and beneficiaries except non service connected 
veterans exceeding the income threshold in VA medical centers, 
nursing homes, domiciliaries, and outpatient clinic facilities, 
contract hospitals, State domiciliaries, nursing homes and 
hospitals, contract community nursing homes, and outpatient 
programs on a fee basis. Hospital and outpatient care is also 
provided by the private sector for certain dependents and 
survivors of veterans under the civilian health and medical 
programs for the Department of Veterans Affairs.
    The Committee recommendation includes $15,779,220,000 for 
medical services for priority 1-6 veterans and eligible 
dependents in fiscal year 2004. The bill includes language 
delaying the availability of $200,000,000 of funds requested 
for the equipment object classification until August 1, 2004, 
and two-year availability of $700,000,000. The Committee 
emphasizes that the two-year funding provision is not meant to 
create ``emergency funds'' and that all resources should be 
spent in a timely and responsible manner addressing veterans 
health needs.
    The bill also includes requested language in the 
Compensation, Pension, and Burial Benefits appropriation 
transferring $9,090,000 for administrative expenses of 
implementing cost saving provisions required by the Omnibus 
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, and the Veterans' Benefits 
Act of 1992.
    The Committee is hopeful that an agreement can be reached 
between the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department 
of Health and Human Services to establish a Medicare Choice-
type program at the VA to provide reimbursable medical care 
services at the VA to Medicare-eligible veterans. The Committee 
directs the implementation of such plan in fiscal year 2004 and 
expects the Secretary to testify on the development of such 
plan at the 2005 budget hearing.
    The Committee strongly urges the Secretary to examine the 
feasibility of creating a prescription drug only benefit for 
veterans currently on the waiting list to be enrolled in the VA 
health care system. The Committee requests that the Secretary 
report by December 1, 2003 to the Committees on Appropriations 
on the number of veterans who would benefit from such proposal, 
the costs to the VA of implementing such proposal--both in 
terms of cost avoidance and pharmacy increases, and a proposed 
fee structure for such benefit.
    The Committee is greatly frustrated with reports from the 
Office of Inspector General regarding the lack of time and 
attendance compliance of VA's part-time and specialty doctors. 
The Committee has provided increased funding over the years to 
meet the demand of waiting lists and to reduce the patient 
backlog in specialty clinics. The Committee directs the 
Secretary to provide at the time of the budget submission a 
plan to address and correct this issue.
    The Committee directs the establishment of no less than two 
new Mental Illness Research Education and Clinic Centers 
(MIRECC) in VISNs which currently do not have a MIRECC and have 
a hospital with an already strong mental health care program.
    The Committee strongly urges the Department to continue to 
increase the number of Mental Health Intensive Case Management 
(MHICM) teams and to fully staff existing teams. Further, the 
Committee directs the VA to ensure that any savings derived 
from the closure of inpatient psychiatric beds be transferred 
into community-based treatment services for veterans with 
severe mental illness and not to programs serving lower 
priority veterans.
    The Committee directs the VA to ensure that each VISN 
follow through on plans to implement mental health services in 
each Community Based Outpatient Clinic (CBOC). The Committee is 
concerned that many CBOCs provide only the minimal levels of 
basic mental health services. The Committee recommends that the 
VA expedite their ability to provide better care by increasing 
the mental health capacity of CBOCs.
    The Committee is aware of new psoriasis treatments that 
have been proven significantly more effective than conventional 
treatments used by VHA in the past. Therefore, the Committee 
urges VHA to explore use of these therapies to treat veterans 
who suffer from psoriasis.
    The Committee encourages the VA to consider ultrasound 
medical tracking technology and its ability to prevent theft 
and promote safety in VA hospitals without interfering with 
sensitive electronic equipment. The Committee requests the VA 
to report back on the effectiveness of such technology, costs 
and compatibility by March 1, 2004.
    The Committee directs all monies collected by the 
Department of Veterans' Affairs should remain in the current VA 
system, and not returned to the U.S. Treasury. Further, the 
Committee directs that all funds collected as the result of 
increased co-payments and fees authorized under the Veterans 
Millennium Health Care Act, as associated legislation, remain 
in the VA system to provide veterans medical care.
    The Committee directs the continuation of the long-employed 
Joslin Vision Network at no less than the current level.
    The Committee reiterates its concern for veterans with 
hepatitis C, and applauds the Department for the progress made 
so far, including establishing screening and testing services 
that have reached an estimated 40% of VA health care users, 
funding a prevalence study to better define risk factors among 
veterans, and creating a National hepatitis C registry to 
better track and manage patients. The Committee recommends that 
the Department do more to improve screening and testing for 
hepatitis C among all Vietnam veterans; provide tests to other 
veterans in the VA system who have risk factors for hepatitis 
C; and participate in a national outreach effort to inform all 
veterans about the disease. The Committee urges increased 
efforts and resources be devoted to the treatment and effective 
disease management of veterans with hepatitis C and notes that 
failure to do so will lead to more end-stage liver disease, 
liver transplantation and morbidity.
    The Committee encourages the VA to consider Patient Health 
Monitoring Technology which could improve the quality of care 
in Coronary Bypass Graft units. The Committee requests the VA 
to report back on the effectiveness of the technology, costs 
and compatibility by March 1, 2004.
    The Committee strongly recommends the establishment of 
CBOCs in the Saltville area of Virginia, and the Montrose area 
of Pennsylvania.
    The Committee encourages the pilot chiropractic initiative 
underway at the Buffalo, New York VAMC.

               MEDICAL SERVICES FOR PRIORITY 7-8 VETERANS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $2,164,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................                 0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........    +2,164,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......    +2,164,000,000


    This Medical Services for Priority 7-8 Veterans 
appropriation provides for medical services to non service-
connected veterans and veterans exceeding the income threshold 
in VA medical centers, outpatient clinic facilities, contract 
hospitals, State homes, and outpatient programs on a fee basis.
    The Committee recommendation provides $2,164,000,000 for 
medical services for priority 7 and 8 veterans. Bill language 
is included which transfers $1,500,000,000 from the Medical 
Care Collections Funds into this account, to be available until 
expended, for the purposes of providing medical services to 
this population.
    The Committee has watched with great interest the 
Department's development and proposed implementation of a new 
automated financial management system for VHA. For the last two 
years the Committee directed and provided funds for the 
Department to undertake a third party billing demonstration 
using a commercially available health care financial management 
system as a tool to gain experience in this area while planning 
for and development of a VA-wide system was being undertaken. 
The Department neglected to accomplish any demonstration, 
instead concentrating on system development. Now, the 
Department is on the verge of acquiring and testing 
commercially available software as the first phase of its 
system wide plan without the benefit of any knowledge gained 
through a demonstration.
    The Committee does not want to belabor this lost 
opportunity or slow down the implementation of a new financial 
management system. On the contrary, the Committee is very 
interested in urging the Department to speed up the timetable 
for implementation of the new system and views the 
implementation of such system as the key to the VA's ability to 
continue to provide medical services to priority 7-8 veterans. 
While the private and public health care industry and the DOD 
health care system have embraced commercially available 
software for health care financial management, the VA has 
apparently not gained confidence in the commercial sector and 
is proceeding extremely slowly. In the implementation of the 
proposed system-wide plan, it will take the VA until 2008 to 
achieve Department wide implantation, at the earliest. This is 
because of lengthy testing of the selected system, followed by 
installation and lengthy testing at one hospital, followed by 
installation and lengthy testing in one state, followed by 
installation system-wide. The VA will lose hundreds of millions 
of dollars in this time.
    The Committee strongly urges the Department to shorten the 
trial periods at the various implementation levels. While a 
phased approach is reasonable, having so many phases with such 
lengthy tests seems unnecessary to document success or identify 
problems.

                    Medical and Prosthetic Research


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $408,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       397,400,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       408,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +10,600,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    This account includes medical, rehabilitative and health 
services research. Medical research is an important aspect of 
the Department's programs, providing complete medical and 
hospital services for veterans. The prosthetic research program 
is also essential in the development and testing of prosthetic, 
orthopedic and sensory aids for the purpose of improving the 
care and rehabilitation of eligible disabled veterans, 
including amputees, paraplegics and the blind. The health 
service research program provides unique opportunities to 
improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the health care 
delivery system. In addition, budgetary resources from a number 
of areas including appropriations from the medical care 
account; reimbursements from the Department of Defense; and 
grants from the National Institutes of Health, private 
proprietary sources, and voluntary agencies provide support for 
the Department's researchers.
    The Committee recommends $408,000,000 for medical and 
prosthetic research in fiscal year 2004. This funding level is 
$10,600,000 over the fiscal year 2003 appropriation and equal 
to the budget request.
    The Committee is interested in the Department's proposal to 
shift research priorities for medical and prosthetic research. 
The Committee places a high priority on the Medical Research 
Service for its focus on health care issues of special concerns 
to veterans. Encouraging physicians in veterans' medical 
centers to engage in research contributes to the highest 
possible quality of care for veterans. The Committee commends 
the Department for its efforts to accelerate the translation of 
basic research into clinical applications. At the same time the 
Committee believes that a wide range of research, including 
basic research, will yield benefits to veterans over the long 
term. The Committee urges the Secretary to submit an 
explanation of its research priorities for medical and 
prosthetic research, including any changes in relative priority 
of basic and clinical research in a report due 90 days after 
enactment. The report should also explain any changes to the 
peer review system used to evaluate research proposals within 
the Medical Research Service.
    The Committee supports research endeavors in the area of 
bioartificial kidney development as a relevant program in the 
VA Rehabilitation Service to maximize functional recovery of 
veterans suffering from end-stage renal disease.
    The Committee encourages research in the area of 
neurodegenerative diseases and regeneration.
    The Committee directs $1,000,000 for the continuation of 
VA's partnership with the National Technology Transfer Center.

                         MEDICAL ADMINISTRATION

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $4,854,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................                 0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........    +4,854,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......    +4,854,000,000


    The Medical Administration appropriation provides funds for 
the expenses of management and administration of VHA. Included 
under this heading are provisions for costs associated with 
operation of VHA headquarters (formerly funded under the 
Medical Administration and Miscellaneous Operating Expenses), 
plus the costs of VISN offices and facility director offices, 
all information technology hardware and software, legal 
services, billing and coding activities, and procurement.
    The Committee recommends $4,854,000,000 for Medical 
Administration in fiscal year 2004. Bill language is included 
allowing the Secretary to transfer funds from this account to 
Medical Services as necessary after notifying the Committees on 
Appropriations.
    In light of the recent research-related deaths at the 
Albany VAMC, the Committee directs that of the funds provided 
under this heading, not less than $5,000,000 shall be for the 
creation of a research oversight board, reporting jointly to 
the Secretary and the Undersecretary for Health, to implement 
research protocols related specifically to patient protections. 
The VA is to consult with the National Institutes of Health in 
this area, and comprise a system appropriate to VA, but 
offering the same, if not better, oversight of VA research and 
patients. The Committee expected that the VA would have 
instituted a more stringent oversight board after the Albany 
deaths, rather than dismantling the existing oversight board.

                           MEDICAL FACILITIES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $4,000,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................                 0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........    +4,000,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......    +4,000,000,000


    The Medical Facilities appropriation provides funds for the 
operation, maintenance and security of VHA's vast capital 
infrastructure. Included under this heading are provisions for 
costs associated with utilities, engineering, capital planning, 
leases, laundry and food services, grounds keeping, garbage, 
housekeeping, security, facility repair, and property 
disposition and acquisition.
    The Committee recommendation provides $4,000,000,000 for 
Medical Facilities. Bill language is included which delays 
$80,000,000 of the requested funds for the land and structures 
object classification until August 1, 2004, and language 
allowing the Secretary to transfer funds from this account to 
Medical Services after notifying the Committees on 
Appropriations.

                      Departmental Administration


                       GENERAL OPERATING EXPENSES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $1,283,272,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................  \1\ 1,245,849,00
                                                                       0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     1,283,272,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +37,423,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                0

\1\ Does not include a supplemental appropriation of $100,000,000 in
  Public Law 108-11.

    The General Operating Expenses appropriation provides for 
the administration of non-medical veterans benefits through the 
Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) and top management 
direction and support. The Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 
changed the accounting of Federal credit programs and required 
that all administrative costs associated with such programs be 
included within the respective credit accounts. Beginning in 
fiscal year 1992, costs incurred by housing, education, and 
vocational rehabilitation programs for administration of these 
credit programs are reimbursed by those accounts. The bill 
includes the budget requests totaling $156,813,000 in other 
accounts for these credit programs. In addition, $7,966,000 is 
transferred from the compensation and pensions account for 
administrative costs of implementing cost saving provisions 
required by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 and 
the Veterans' Benefits Act of 1992. Section 107 of the 
administrative provisions provides requested language which 
permits excess revenues in three insurance funds to be used for 
administrative expenses. The VA estimates that $38,922,000 will 
be utilized for such purposes in fiscal year 2004. Prior to 
fiscal year 1996, such costs were included in the general 
operating expenses appropriation. Thus, in total, 
$1,833,979,000 is requested in fiscal year 2004 for 
administrative costs of non-medical benefits.
    The Committee recommends $1,283,272,000 for General 
Operating Expenses. This amount represents an increase of 
$37,423,000 above the current level, and equal to the budget 
request. The bill includes requested language allowing 
$66,000,000 of the funds appropriated to be available for 
obligation for two years, the purchase of two motor vehicles 
for the VBA office in Manila, Philippines, and a travel 
limitation of $17,082,000. The bill also includes language 
directing the VBA to be funded at not less than $1,005,000,000.
    The Committee has not provided any funds for a new 
Assistant Secretary of Operations, Security and Preparedness 
and does not recommend funding for such office, other than a 
coordinator, at the Department. The Committee is very concerned 
with the Department's ability to simply fulfill the basic 
requirements of providing benefits and medical services in a 
correct and timely manner and feels that the Department should 
concentrate on meeting the basic mission of the VA rather than 
looking to expand its portfolio of responsibilities into the 
homeland security area. The Committee feels confident that 
other agencies and departments specifically responsible for 
homeland security and defense activities are adequately 
managing and funding those initiatives.
    The Committee strongly urges the Department to retain 
consolidation of the Department's information technology 
initiatives in the Office of the Chief Information Officer 
(CIO). The Committee directs that all cyber-security and 
enterprise architecture activities be managed by the CIO.
    The Committee is pleased with the Department's initiatives 
to modernize its computing infrastructure and supports the 
continued implementation of the One-VA Enterprise Architecture 
Plan. Similar models used by the commercial sector have 
resulted in significantly reduced operating costs and improved 
overall performance. The Committee directs the VA to proceed 
with information technology initiatives, including the 
acquisition of data replication technologies, to provide 
continuity of operations capability for corporate data centers 
through the Corporate Data Center Infrastructure initiative. 
Further, the Committee also directs the VA to proceed with the 
acquisition of data replication technologies in order to 
provide continuity of operations for messaging consolidation, 
office automation, and other necessary applications at the VA's 
regional computing centers. The Committee has allocated 
$25,000,000 Department-wide for these activities.

                    NATIONAL CEMETERY ADMINISTRATION




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation......................       $144,223,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......................        132,284,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request......................        144,203,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......        +11,939,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request......            +20,000


    The National Cemetery Administration was established in 
accordance with the National Cemeteries Act of 1973. It has a 
fourfold mission: to provide for the interment in any national 
cemetery with available grave space the remains of eligible 
deceased servicepersons and discharged veterans, together with 
their spouses and certain dependents, and to permanently 
maintain their graves; to mark graves of eligible persons in 
national and private cemeteries; to administer the grant 
program for aid to States in establishing, expanding, or 
improving State veterans' cemeteries; and to administer the 
Presidential Memorial Certificate Program. This appropriation 
provides for the operation and maintenance of 157 cemeterial 
installations in 39 States, the District of Columbia, and 
Puerto Rico.
    The Committee recommends $144,223,000 for the National 
Cemetery Administration in fiscal year 2004. This funding level 
is $11,919,000 over the 2003 level and $20,000 over the budget 
request. The Committee is providing funds to meet needs 
associated with new cemeteries and the increased workload 
projected by the Department.
    The Committee recommends not more than $24,500 for the 
exhumation of American soldiers buried under a roadway outside 
the Johnson's Island Cemetery in Sandusky, Ohio, which is under 
the jurisdiction of the VA; their re-internment in the 
cemetery; and a marker with the corrected names of the 
Confederate soldiers buried at Johnson's Island Cemetery.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation......................        $61,750,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......................         57,623,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request......................         61,750,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......         +4,127,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request......                  0


    The Office of Inspector General was established by the 
Inspector General Act of 1978 and is responsible for the audit, 
investigation and inspection of all Department of Veterans 
Affairs programs and operations. The overall operational 
objective is to focus available resources on areas which would 
help improve services to veterans and their beneficiaries, 
assist managers of Department programs to operate economically 
in accomplishing program goals, and prevent and deter recurring 
and potential fraud, waste and inefficiencies.
    The Committee has provided $61,750,000 for the Office of 
Inspector General in fiscal year 2004. This amount is an 
increase of $4,127,000 above the current year appropriation and 
equal to the budget request.

                      CONSTRUCTION, MAJOR PROJECTS




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation......................       $274,690,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......................         99,128,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request......................        272,690,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......       +175,562,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request......         +2,000,000


    The construction, major projects appropriation provides for 
constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of the 
facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of the VA, 
including planning, architectural and engineering services, 
Capital Asset Realignment Enhanced Services (CARES) activities, 
assessments and site acquisition where the estimated cost of a 
project is $4,000,000 or more. Emphasis is placed on correction 
of life/safety code deficiencies in existing Department medical 
facilities.
    The bill provides $274,690,000 for construction, major 
projects, in fiscal year 2004, an increase of $2,000,000 over 
the budget justification, and an increase of $175,562,000 over 
last year's funding level. Also, the bill includes $173,000,000 
for CARES and $10,000,000 for the Judgment Fund.
    The Committee directs that of the funds provided under VHA 
Advance Planning Fund, $9,000,000 is for the preliminary 
planning and design of the Denver VAMC relocation to the 
Fitzsimmons campus; a unique opportunity for the VA to enter 
into a sharing agreement with the Department of Defense and the 
University of Colorado to replace aging and outdated facilities 
with a shared campus design which will be cost efficient to all 
parties and beneficial to veterans. The Committee is looking to 
the Fitzsimmons project as a model for future shared Federal 
health care facility construction projects.
    Also under the VHA Advance Planning Fund, $500,000 is for 
preliminary planning of a new ambulatory clinic at the Defense 
Supply Center (DSC) campus in Columbus, Ohio. CARES market data 
show that the workload in Columbus will remain constant over 
time and the current facility is inadequate to meet the demand.
    The Committee strongly urges the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs to continue negotiations with the Secretary of Defense 
to determine a suitable site on the DSC campus for clinic 
construction.
    The Committee is fully supportive of the CARES initiative 
and applauds the Department for moving forward with the 
implementation of the VISN 12 plan and Phase II of the study. 
The Committee directs VA to dispose expeditiously with the 
Lakeside VAMC at full market value in order to commence 
construction at the West Side VAMC.
    The Committee directs the VA to fully fund any CARES 
implementation plans in future budgets and report to the 
Committee the framework for prioritization of the capital 
improvement projects that will be identified as priorities 
resulting from the CARES studies. The Committee further directs 
the VA to only present CARES recommendations for a VISN if 
supporting funds are requested by the Department in budget 
justification materials or budget amendments, or provided in 
advance by the Congress.
    The Committee directs the CARES study to examine the 
possibility where, in some markets, the best recommendation, 
both in terms of economics and service delivery, is to build a 
new facility in full cooperation with another entity such as 
the Department of Defense or the state, such as the Committee 
is recommending at the Fitzsimmons campus. In these instances, 
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs must actively consult with 
non-VA public entities to plan for a new, jointly held and 
funded facility.
    The Committee directs that any major construction project 
included in future budget submissions be approved by the CARES 
study and realignment plan or the national cemetery study.
    Of the amounts recommended under the NCA Advance Planning 
Fund, $2,000,000 is for advance planning of a national cemetery 
on land transferred to the Department of Veterans Affairs at 
the Miramar Naval Air Station.
    The specific amounts recommended by the Committee are as 
follows:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Available through                           House
                Location and description                        2003           2004 request      recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Veterans Health Administration (VHA):
    CARES Project--TBD.................................                  0            183,000            173,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, CARES..................................                  0            183,000            173,000
                                                        ========================================================
Advance Planning Fund: Various stations................                  0             15,000             25,000
Asbestos abatement: Various stations...................                  O              5,000              5,000
Claims Analyses: various locations.....................                  0              2,000              2,000
Judgement Fund: Various locations......................                  0             10,000             10,000
Hazardous Waste: Various locations.....................                  0              1,000              1,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Other line items.......................                  0             33,000             43,000
                                                        ========================================================
      Subtotal, VHA....................................                  0            216,000            226,000
                                                        ========================================================
Veterans Benefits Administration.......................                  0                271                271
National Cemetery Administration (NCA):
    Detroit, MI Area, Phase I Development..............                  0              8,700              8,700
Cemetery Expansion and Improvements:
    Fort Snelling, MN, gravesite expansion and cemetery                  0             24,800             24,800
     improvements......................................
    Barrancas, FL gravesite expansion and cemetery                       0             12,000             12,000
     improvements......................................
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Construction...........................                  0             45,500             45,500
                                                        ========================================================
Design Fund: Various locations.........................                  0              6,000              6,000
Advance Planning Fund: Various locations...............                  0              2,919              4,919
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Other line-items.......................                  0              8,919             10,919
                                                        ========================================================
      Total NCA construction, major projects...........                  0             54,419             56,419
                                                        ========================================================
    Staff Offices: Various locations...................                  0              2,000              2,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total construction, major projects...............                  0            272,690            274,690
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      CONSTRUCTION, MINOR PROJECTS




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation......................       $252,144,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......................        224,531,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request......................        252,144,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......        +27,613,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request......                  0


    The construction, minor projects appropriation provides for 
constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of the 
facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of the 
Department, including planning, CARES activities, assessment of 
needs, architectural and engineering services, and site 
acquisition, where the estimated cost of a project is less than 
$4,000,000.
    The Committee recommends $252,144,000 for the construction, 
minor projects appropriation in fiscal year 2004, equal to the 
budget request and an increase of $27,613,000 over the fiscal 
year 2003 appropriation. The Committee directs that $25,000,000 
of the funds provided be used specifically to address quality 
and safety issues in VA research facilities.
    The Committee directs that VHA's minor construction 
resources should be utilized in a manner that is consistent 
with current CARES initiatives and the national cemetery study. 
A central office work group consisting of both VHA and other 
Department officials must review all VHA minor construction 
projects. For evaluation purposes, the work group is to utilize 
criteria that are consistent with those developed for CARES. If 
total costs of projects being initiated at any facility is or 
exceeds $4,000,000 (the Capital Investment Board threshold), 
the recommendations of the work group must be approved by the 
Deputy Secretary.

       GRANTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STATE EXTENDED CARE FACILITIES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $102,100,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        99,350,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       102,100,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        +2,750,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    This program provides grants to assist States to construct 
State home facilities, for furnishing domiciliary or nursing 
home care to veterans, and to expand, remodel or alter existing 
buildings for furnishing domiciliary, nursing home or hospital 
care to veterans in State homes. A grant may not exceed 65 
percent of the total cost of the project.
    The Committee recommends $102,100,000 for grants for 
construction of State extended care facilities in fiscal year 
2004. This amount is equal to the budget request.
    The Committee encourages the Department to work with the 
State of New Jersey as that state applies for a grant to expand 
the Paramus facility.

          GRANTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STATE VETERANS CEMETERIES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $32,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        31,792,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        32,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +208,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    This program provides grants to assist States with the 
establishment, expansion, and improvement of State veterans' 
cemeteries which are operated and permanently maintained by the 
States. Grants under this program fund up to 100 percent of 
construction costs and the initial equipment expenses when the 
cemetery is established. The states remain responsible for 
providing the land and for paying all costs related to the 
operation and maintenance of the state cemeteries, including 
the costs for subsequent equipment purchases.
    The Committee recommends the budget request of $32,000,000 
for grants for the construction of State veterans cemeteries in 
fiscal year 2004, an increase of $208,000 over the current 
year's funding level.
    The Committee encourages the Department to work with the 
State of California as that State applies for a grant to 
establish a State cemetery on 156 acres of the former Fort Ord 
in California.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

    The bill continues the first fourteen administrative 
provisions from title I contained in Public Law 108-7, the 
fiscal year 2003 appropriations bill, with revised dollar 
figures, and four new provisions.
    Section 115 allows the Secretary to create a priority 
system based on service connection or income for veterans 
seeking medical services. Section 116 directs the Secretary to 
conduct cost-recovery audits. Section 117 allows funds for 
medical services to be used to furnish veterans with 
recreational supplies and to provide funeral and burial for 
eligible beneficiaries. Section 118 allows for the transfer of 
balances as of August 1, 2004 in the Medical Care Collections 
Fund to the Medical Services for Priority 7-8 Veterans account. 
Section 119 allows for the transfer of up to 10 percent of the 
funds between the Medical Services for Priority 1-6 Veterans 
account and the Medical Services for Priority 7-8 Veterans 
account as needed. Section 120 renames the Houston VAMC as the 
``Michael E. DeBakey Department of Veterans Affairs Medical 
Center.''

         TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT


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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 recommendation:
    Program Level...................................     $36,995,306,000
    Fee Collections.................................      -3,464,000,000
    Rescissions.....................................      -1,705,000,000
        Net Appropriation \1\.......................      31,826,306,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation:
    Program Level...................................      36,052,908,000
    Fee Collections.................................      -3,336,000,000
    Rescissions/Offsets.............................      -1,708,000,000
        Net Appropriation...........................      31,008,908,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request:
    Program Level...................................      36,898,612,000
    Fee Collections.................................      -3,464,000,000
    Rescissions/Offsets.............................      -1,705,000,000
        Net Appropriation \1\.......................      31,729,612,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation:
    Program Level...................................        +942,398,000
    Fee Collections.................................        -128,000,000
    Rescissions/Offsets.............................          +3,000,000
        Net Appropriation \1\.......................        +817,398,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2004 budget request:
    Program Level...................................         +96,694,000
    Fee Collections.................................                   0
    Rescissions/Offsets.............................                   0
        Net Appropriation \1\.......................        +96,694,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The fiscal year 2004 totals do not reflect a legislative proposal
  assumed in the budget transferring the Federal Emergency Management
  Agency's (FEMA) Emergency Food and Shelter Program to the Department.

    The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was 
established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-174). HUD is the principal Federal 
agency responsible for administering and regulating programs 
and industries concerned with the Nation's housing needs, 
economic and community development, and fair housing 
opportunities.
    In carrying out the mission of serving the needs and 
interests of the Nation's communities and of the people who 
live and work in them, HUD administers mortgage and loan 
insurance programs, rental and homeownership subsidy programs 
for low-income families, neighborhood rehabilitation programs, 
and community development programs.
    The Committee recommends a total program level of 
$36,995,306,000 for the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, a $942,398,000 increase above the fiscal year 2003 
level, and $96,694,000 above the request. The recommendation 
reflects the Committee desire to invest resources in a manner 
which best ensures that funds provided can be used to provide 
safe, decent and affordable housing and to promote economic 
development in communities across the country.

                       Public and Indian Housing


                        HOUSING CERTIFICATE FUND

              (INCLUDING TRANSFER AND RESCISSION OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation......................    $18,430,606,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......................     17,111,613,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request......................              \1\ 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......     +1,318,993,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request......  \1\ +18,430,606,0
                                                                      00

\1\ The fiscal year 2004 budget proposed to eliminate this account and
  instead fund activities previously included in the Housing Certificate
  Fund account in a new Housing Assistance for Needy Families account
  and a new Project-Based Rental Assistance account.

    The Housing Certificate Fund (HCF) provides funding for 
costs associated with the Section 8 program. The account 
includes funding for the renewal of expiring Section 8 project-
based contracts, amendments to existing Section 8 project-based 
contracts, renewal of expiring Section 8 vouchers, new tenant 
protection vouchers including enhanced vouchers, new 
incremental Section 8 vouchers, relocation assistance, payment 
of fees to public housing agencies administering Section 8 
voucher programs, and payment of fees to contract 
administrators for project-based Section 8 contracts.
    The Committee recommendation continues funding for the 
Section 8 program in the Housing Certificate Fund (HCF) account 
rather than funding the program through the proposed Housing 
Assistance for Needy Families account and the proposed Project-
Based Rental Assistance account. The Committee recommendation 
provides the same total level of resources requested in the 
budget for the Section 8 programs. As proposed in the budget, 
the Committee recommendation assumes $1,072,000,000 is 
available from fiscal year 2001 and prior year recaptures to 
offset fiscal year 2004 requirements. However, the Committee 
has increased the direct appropriation by this amount and 
increased the rescission by a corresponding amount to reflect 
this one-time savings. Consistent with the budget request, the 
Committee recommends $4,200,000,000 in advance appropriations.
    The recommendation provides a direct appropriation of 
$18,430,606,000 for the HCF, an increase of $1,318,993,179 
above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2003. This 
represents a 7 percent increase over the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2003. In addition, $1,000,000,000 is available from 
unobligated carryover balances in program reserve accounts and 
up to $721,000,000 is available from unobligated balances in 
administrative fee reserve accounts to support Section 8 
activities which will provide a total program level of up to 
$20,151,606,000.
    The Committee recommendation includes the amount necessary 
to fully fund all authorized vouchers requiring renewal 
assuming a total average leasing rate of 96 percent in 2004 
based on the most recent estimate of national average per unit 
rental subsidy cost based on verified cost data.
    The recommendation continues the budget reforms enacted in 
fiscal year 2003 for the Section 8 voucher program, as 
requested. Prior to these reforms, budgeting practices failed 
to accurately reflect a realistic estimate of the funding 
necessary to support the total authorized voucher level. Prior 
budgeting practices failed to take into account fluctuations in 
leasing rates over the course of the year as well as the 
significant under-utilization of authorized voucher by some 
public housing authorities. With the enactment of the reforms 
in fiscal year 2003 and continued in fiscal year 2004, the 
Committee has eliminated the likelihood of huge amounts of 
Section 8 funds not being spent and later recaptured.
    The recommendation includes the following:
    --Renewal of expiring Section 8 contracts: $16,295,578,000 
for renewals of Section 8 vouchers and project-based contracts, 
an increase of $1,304,448,179 over the fiscal year 2003 level, 
and $205,709,996 over the request. This represents a 7 percent 
increase over the level provided for renewals in fiscal year 
2003. These amounts are provided as follows:
    Section 8 Vouchers.--The Committee recommends 
$11,575,181,100 for the estimated renewal costs of Section 8 
voucher renewals, an increase of $633,811,100 over the fiscal 
year 2003 level and $193,565,100 above the request.
    The recommendation assumes a 92 percent average leasing 
rate for authorized vouchers requiring renewal in fiscal year 
2004 as assumed in the budget. When combined with amounts 
provided in the Central Fund, the recommendation will support a 
96 percent national average leasing rate in fiscal year 2004.
    The Committee has provided a $195,565,100 increase above 
the request for renewals to reflect re-estimates of the 
national average per unit rental subsidy cost, exclusive of 
administrative fees, based upon the most recent verified cost 
data. The original budget request, which was submitted prior to 
the availability of complete verified 2002 cost data, assumed a 
national average per unit rental subsidy cost of $5,880. The 
Committee has provided funding assuming a $5,980 national 
average per unit rental subsidy cost, the most recent estimate 
based on the verified actual 2002 cost data adjusted for 
inflationary cost increases.
    Section 8 Quality Assurance Division.--The Committee 
appreciates that the reforms included in the fiscal year 2003 
appropriations Act required a significant overhaul in the way 
the budget for the Section 8 voucher program is formulated and 
executed. The Committee commends the Department for the 
initiative it has shown and the tremendous amount of work it 
has done to expeditiously implement these reforms. The 
Committee believes that the reforms implemented provide a 
framework for making continued refinements to improve the 
accuracy and timeliness of current and future Section 8 funding 
requirements.
    The Committee notes that while the Department currently 
requires public housing authorities to report on their monthly 
leasing rates and costs, such data is not currently verified 
and reconciled with funding levels provided. The Committee 
believes that more timely verification of voucher use and 
spending will enable the Department and the Congress to better 
monitor current Section 8 spending and project future budget 
requirements. Therefore, the recommendation includes 
$10,000,000 and 75 FTE within the Salaries and Expenses account 
for the Office of Public and Indian Housing to establish a 
Quality Assurance Division for the Section 8 Voucher program to 
provide more timely validation of PHA program and financial 
information and ensure compliance with voucher program 
requirements.
    Language is included in the bill, identical to language 
carried in fiscal year 2003, setting forth the distribution of 
funds provided for Section 8 voucher renewals.
    Project-Based Section 8.--The recommendation assumes 
$4,720,396,900 for renewals of project-based Section 8 
contracts (including moderate rehabilitation contracts), the 
full amount requested. Pursuant to the budget request, no new 
funding is provided for project-based Section 8 contract 
amendments for fiscal year 2004, and instead assumes that 
amendment requirements will be met through recaptures.
    --Central Reserve Fund: $568,503,000 to be allocated by the 
Secretary to address significant increases in the lease up rate 
or per unit costs above the amounts provided to a public 
housing authority (PHA) for renewals and replenishment of PHA 
one-month program reserves as necessary. The Committee notes 
that an additional $1,000,000,000 will be available to PHAs 
through their program reserves, in addition to amounts provided 
in the bill for estimated renewal requirements, to address 
additional leasing and per unit rental subsidy cost increases. 
Language is continued, identical to language carried in fiscal 
year 2003, requiring a PHA to use at least 50 percent of its 
program reserves prior to requesting funds from the central 
fund.
    Funding included for the central reserve fund is only to be 
for rental subsidy costs and replenishment of program reserves. 
Funding for associated administrative expenses has been 
provided for separately within this account.
    Language is continued, identical to language included in 
fiscal year 2003, setting forth the allowable uses.
    Language is also continued directing the Secretary to 
provide quarterly reports to the Committee on the use of funds 
from the central reserve fund in accordance with the following 
direction: such report shall include, at a minimum, the amount 
of funding distributed for additional renewal costs, delineated 
by PHA; the amount of funding used to replenish program 
reserves, delineated by PHA; the amount of additional voucher 
assistance provided to eligible PHAs, delineated by PHA; the 
amount of any recaptures, delineated by PHA; and the total 
balance remaining in the fund. The Secretary is directed to 
provide the first quarterly report no later than January 31, 
2004.
    --Tenant Protection: $206,495,000 for tenant protection 
activities to replace lost project-based section 8 with Section 
8 vouchers; for conversion of section 202 and section 23 
projects to section 8 vouchers; for the family unification 
program; and for the witness protection program. Again this 
year, funding for new vouchers under the HOPE VI program is to 
be provided within the Revitalization of Severely Distressed 
Public Housing (HOPE VI) account. Funding included for tenant 
protection is only to be used for rental subsidies. Funding for 
associated administrative expenses is provided separately 
within this account.
    --Family Self-Sufficiency Coordinators: $48,000,000 for 
service coordinator staff in each eligible public housing 
agency.
    --Administrative Costs: Section 8 Voucher Program: not to 
exceed $1,209,020,000 for PHA administrative costs and other 
expenses to administer the Section 8 program, as requested and 
$136,763,000 above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 2003.
    The recommendation provides an 11 percent increase over the 
amount PHAs reported being spent in fiscal year 2002 to 
administer the Section 8 voucher program. While the Committee 
does not recommend language proposed in the budget to limit 
administrative fees based upon the total amount of funding 
provided for rental subsidy payments, the Committee recommends 
language to limit administrative fee payments in fiscal year 
2004 to not more than the total amount appropriated for 
administrative costs. The Committee notes that absent such 
limitation, the amount of administrative fees paid would 
increase by $332,647,000, a 30 percent increase above the 
amount actually spent by PHAs to administer their programs in 
2002. The Committee recommendation ensures that PHA 
administrative funding needs are met, while also ensuring that 
the necessary resources are available to meet the rental 
subsidy needs of families who rely on Section 8.
    The allocation of administrative funds is to be determined 
by the Secretary. The Department is expected to consult with 
the Committee as it makes this determination.
    --Administrative Costs--Project-Based Section 8 Program: 
$100,000,000 for contractors to administer the project-based 
section 8 program, the full amount requested.
    --Working Capital Fund: not less than $3,010,000 for 
transfer to the Working Capital Fund for the development of and 
modifications to information technology systems.
    The recommendation does not include $36,000,000 requested 
for new incremental vouchers for non-elderly disabled persons 
impacted by the designation of public housing as elderly only. 
Language is included in the bill requiring public housing 
authorities to continue to reserve incremental vouchers funded 
in previous year for persons with disabilities upon turnover.

                 HOUSING ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.....................                  $0
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation......................                   0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.....................      12,535,201,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation......                   0
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.....     -12,535,201,000


    The Committee does not adopt the budget proposal to fund 
the section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (tenant-based assistance) 
program as a separate new account but instead has continued 
funding for these activities in the Housing Certificate Fund as 
provided for in previous years.
    Proposed language is not included to designate fiscal year 
2004 funds for activities related to the implementation of the 
Administration's legislative proposal to block grant the 
Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program to the States. The 
Committee notes that this proposal is currently under 
consideration by the relevant authorization committees and 
therefore defers any changes to the funding structure of the 
program until further congressional action on the legislative 
proposal.

                    PROJECT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation......................                 $0
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......................                  0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request......................      4,823,405,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......                  0
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request......     -4,823,405,000


    The Committee does not adopt the budget proposal to fund 
section 8 project-based assistance and related activities as a 
separate new account but instead has continued funding for 
these activities in the Housing Certificate Fund as provided 
for in previous years.

                      PUBLIC HOUSING CAPITAL FUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $2,712,255,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     2,712,255,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     2,641,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       +71,255,000


    The Public Housing Capital Fund provides funding for public 
housing capital programs, including public housing development, 
modernization, and amendments. Examples of capital 
modernization projects include replacing roofs and windows, 
improving common spaces, upgrading electrical and plumbing 
systems, and renovating the interior of an apartment.
    The Committee recommendation includes $2,712,255,000 for 
this program, an increase of $71,255,000 above the request and 
the same amount provided in fiscal year 2003.
    The Committee appreciates the need to modernize public 
housing and continues to believe that the residents of public 
housing deserve timely facilities improvements. Congressional 
concerns over delays in the expenditure of public housing 
capital funds led to the enactment of provisions in the Quality 
Housing and Work Responsibility Act (QHWRA) of 1998 to compel 
more timely completion of needed repair and modernization work 
to the public housing stock. Because of delays in 
implementation of these provision, the fiscal year 2002 and 
2003 appropriations Act included interim provisions to ensure 
that backlog reduction funding was provided to those PHAs which 
were able to spend their funds in a timely fashion as required 
under QHWRA. The recommendation retains language, similar to 
language carried in previous Acts, continuing these interim 
measures. However, the Committee understands that the 
Department plans to fully implement the timeliness provisions 
of QHRWA later this year, therefore language is also included 
to allow all funds to be distributed in accordance with QHWRA 
rather than in accordance with the interim measures should the 
Department fully implement the timeliness requirements of QHRWA 
in fiscal year 2004.
    The Committee appreciates the quarterly reports on the 
obligation and expenditure of capital funds that have been 
provided by HUD. The Committee directs HUD to continue to 
provide these quarterly reports to the Committee, with the 
first such report to be provided no later than February 1, 
2003.
    The Committee recommendation does not include funding, or 
the necessary authorization language, for the Public Housing 
Reinvestment Initiative proposed by the Administration. The 
Committee understands that under existing statutory 
authorities, a number of PHAs have in fact successfully pursued 
approximately $1 billion in public-private financing 
partnerships. While the Committee is interested in exploring 
additional mechanisms to leverage private sector financing for 
capital improvements for public housing, the Committee believes 
that such proposals need to be more fully examined before 
significant statutory and funding changes are made.
    The recommendation does not designate $40,000,000 for costs 
associated with the demolition of severely distressed public 
housing and instead includes $50,000,000 under the HOPE VI 
program for these activities.
    The recommendation also includes funding for the following 
activities, as proposed in the budget: $51,000,000 for 
technical assistance activities; $500,000 for section 23 lease 
adjustments; $55,000,000 for the Resident Opportunity and Self-
Sufficiency program; up to $40,000,000 for emergency and 
natural disaster needs; and no less than $10,610,000 for 
transfer to the Working Capital Fund to support the development 
of and modifications to information technology systems which 
support Public and Indian Housing programs and activities. As 
requested, the recommendation does designate a separate set-
aside for the Neighborhood Networks grants because such 
activities are already an eligible use of capital funds.
    The recommendation includes language making a technical 
correction to the fiscal year 2003 Appropriations Act 
clarifying that PHAs that have remedied their non-compliance 
with obligation and expenditure deadlines are eligible to 
receive backlog reduction funding in fiscal year 2003.

                     PUBLIC HOUSING OPERATING FUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $3,600,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................  \1\ 3,576,600,00
                                                                       0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     3,574,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........   \1\ +23,400,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       +26,000,000


\1\ The fiscal year 2003 Appropriations Act provided $3,326,600,000 for
  fiscal year 2003 payments and $250,000,000 for additional fiscal year
  2002 payments to certain PHAs.

    The Public Housing Operating Fund (PHOF) subsidizes the 
costs associated with operating and maintaining public housing. 
This subsidy supplements funding received by public housing 
authorities (PHA) from tenant rent contributions and other 
income. In accordance with section 9 of the United States 
Housing Act of 1937, as amended, funds are allocated by formula 
to public housing authorities for the following purposes: 
utility costs; anticrime and anti-drug activities, including 
the costs of providing adequate security; routine maintenance 
cost; administrative costs; and general operating expenses.
    The Committee recommends $3,600,000,000 to subsidize PHAs' 
fiscal year 2004 operating costs, an increase of $23,400,000 
above the fiscal year 2003 payment level, and $26,000,000 above 
the request. Continues language, proposed for deletion, 
designating $10,000,000 for transfer to the Department of 
Justice to be allocated by the Attorney General through 
existing programs, such as Weed and Seed, to those areas where 
additional assistance is needed to augment Federal, State and 
local efforts to effectively fight crime and drugs in public 
housing. In addition, the Committee notes that PHAs are 
authorized to use their operating and capital funds for anti-
crime and anti-drug activities. All activities previously 
authorized under the public housing drug elimination program 
(PHDEP) are permissible activities under the operating and 
capital fund accounts.
    The recommendation does not adopt the proposal to fund a 
portion of the Resident Opportunity and Self Sufficiency (ROSS) 
program under this account, but instead has continued funding 
for this program under the Public Housing Capital Fund account.
    Includes language, as proposed in the budget, restating 
fundamental principles of appropriations law which prohibits 
funds appropriated in this Act for fiscal year 2004 payments 
from being used to supplement a prior year appropriation for 
prior year payments.
    Continues language, carried in prior years, prohibiting 
funds from being used for section 9(k) activities. Proposed 
language is not included making funds available for two years.

     REVITALIZATION OF SEVERELY DISTRESSED PUBLIC HOUSING (HOPE VI)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $50,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       570,269,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........      -520,269,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       +50,000,000


    The Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public Housing 
program, also known as HOPE VI, provides competitive grants to 
public housing authorities to revitalize entire neighborhoods 
adversely impacted by the presence of badly deteriorated public 
housing projects. In addition to developing and constructing 
new affordable housing, the program provides PHAs with the 
authority to demolish obsolete projects and to provide self-
sufficiency services for families who reside in and around the 
facility.
    The Committee recommends funding HOPE VI at $50,000,000, of 
which $500,000 is for technical assistance. The budget did not 
request any funding for this program.

                  NATIVE AMERICAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANTS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $661,600,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       644,782,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       646,600,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +16,818,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       +15,000,000


    The Native American Housing Block Grants program provides 
funds to Indian tribes and their tribally-designated housing 
entities (TDHEs) to address housing needs within their 
communities. The block grant is designed to fund a TDHE's 
operating requirements and capital needs.
    The Committee recommends $661,600,000,000 for this account, 
an increase of $15,000,000 above the budget request, and 
$16,818,000 above the fiscal year 2003 level.
    The recommendation includes the following: $1,000,000 for 
the section 601 Loan Guarantee program to guarantee a total 
loan volume of $8,049,000; $5,000,000 for inspections, 
training, travel costs, and technical assistance; $2,200,000 
for the National American Indian Housing Council to conduct 
training programs and to provide technical assistance; no less 
than $2,720,000 for transfer to the Working Capital Fund for 
information technology systems development and modifications; 
and $150,000 for transfer to the HUD salaries and expenses 
account for administrative expenses.
    Proposed language is not included regarding the use of 
funds to address mold problem because such language is 
duplicative of existing statute.

           INDIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program      Limitation on
                                              account      direct loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.........      $5,300,000    $197,243,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation..........       5,266,000     197,243,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.........       1,000,000      27,473,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003                 +34,000               0
 appropriation..........................
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget           +4,300    +169,770,000
 request................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
1992 establishes a loan guarantee program for Native Americans 
to build or purchase homes on trust land. This program provides 
access to sources of private financing for Indian families and 
Indian housing authorities that otherwise cannot acquire 
financing because of the unique legal status of Indian trust 
land. This financing vehicle enables families to construct new 
homes or to purchase existing properties on reservations.
    The Committee recommends $5,300,000 for the section 184 
Loan Guarantee program to guarantee a total loan volume of 
$197,243,000, an increase of $4,300,000 above the request and 
an increase of $34,000 above the level provided in fiscal year 
2003. Language is included transferring $250,000 to the HUD 
salaries and expenses account for administrative expenses.

                  NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING BLOCK GRANT




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................             \1\ 0
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................             \1\ 0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        10,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......   \1\ -10,000,000


\1\ In fiscal year 2003, funding for this program was provided under the
  Community Development Fund.

    The Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership Act of 2000 created 
the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program to provide 
grants to the State of Hawaii Department of Hawaiian Home Lands 
(DHHL) for housing and housing related assistance to develop, 
maintain and operate affordable housing for eligible low-income 
Native Hawaiian families.
    The Committee does not recommend funding this program as a 
separate account as proposed in the budget, but instead 
continues funding for this program under the Community 
Development Fund as provided in fiscal year 2003.

      NATIVE HAWAIIAN HOUSING LOAN GUARANTEE FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program      Limitation on
                                              account      direct loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.........      $1,000,000     $35,348,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation..........       1,028,000      39,712,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.........       1,000,000      35,348,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003                 -28,000      -4,364,000
 appropriation..........................
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget                0               0
 request................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership Act of 2000 created 
the Native Hawaiian Housing Loan Guarantee Fund program to 
provide loan guarantees for native Hawaiian individuals and 
their families, the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the 
Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and private nonprofit organizations 
experienced in the planning and development of affordable 
housing for Native Hawaiians for the purchase, construction, 
and/or rehabilitation of single-family homes on Hawaiian Home 
Lands. This program provides access to private sources of 
financing that would otherwise not be available because of the 
unique legal status of Hawaiian Home Lands.
    The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for this program to 
guarantee a total loan volume of $35,348,000, the full amount 
requested. Language is included transferring $35,000 to the HUD 
salaries and expenses account for administrative expenses.

                   COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

              HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR PERSONS WITH AIDS




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $297,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       290,102,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       297,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        +6,898,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) 
program is authorized by the Housing Opportunities for Persons 
with AIDS Act. This program provides States and localities with 
resources and incentives to devise long-term comprehensive 
strategies to meet the housing needs of persons with HIV/AIDS 
and their families. Ninety percent of funding is distributed by 
formula to qualifying States and metropolitan areas on the 
basis of the cumulative number and incidences of AIDS reported 
to the Centers for Disease Control. The remaining 10 percent of 
funding is distributed through a national competition. 
Government recipients are required to have a HUD-approved 
Comprehensive Plan/Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy 
(CHAS).
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee recommends 
$297,000,000, an increase of $6,898,000 above the fiscal year 
2003 level, and the full amount requested. The increase will 
allow funding for new jurisdictions expected to become eligible 
for funding in fiscal year 2004, while maintaining funding for 
existing jurisdictions. Within the total amount provided, 
$2,000,000 is for technical assistance, training and oversight 
as requested.
    The Committee believes that creating new housing 
opportunities for persons with AIDS should be the priority for 
HOPWA funding. The Committee is concerned over the 
prioritization of HOPWA funding to create new housing versus 
providing services that can be provided by other Federal 
agencies, including the Department of Health and Human 
Services. The Committee requests that the Department provide a 
report no later than August 31, 2003, on the distribution of 
HOPWA funds in each of the last three fiscal years for hard 
housing versus service and care expenses in both the formula 
and national programs. Such report should identify the 
distribution of funding among various categories of services 
and care and should specifically identify the amount spent on 
case management. Such report shall include a specific 
definition of the types services allowable for funding under 
the term ``case management''.
    Language is included making funds available for two years. 
Language is also included, carried in fiscal year 2003, which 
requires the Secretary to renew expiring permanent supportive 
housing contracts previously funded under the national 
competition which meet all program requirements before awarding 
new competitive grants.

                 RURAL HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $25,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        24,837,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +163,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       +25,000,000


    This account provides funding to rural non-profit 
organizations, community development corporations, Indian 
tribes, State housing finance agencies, State economic 
development and/or Federally recognized community development 
agencies.
    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for the Rural Housing 
and Economic Development program, an increase of $163,000 above 
the level provided in fiscal year 2003. The fiscal year 2004 
budget proposed to eliminate funding for this program.
    Modified language is included, similar to language carried 
in previous years, requiring the Department to award funds for 
this program no later than June 30, 2004.
    The Committee does not repeat language carried in previous 
years under this and several other accounts regarding the 
competitive award of funds because such language is duplicative 
of existing statutory requirements pursuant to the Department 
of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 and an 
administrative provision carried under title II year in the 
appropriations Act (section 206 of this Act) that require all 
funds provided to the Department to be competitively awarded 
unless explicitly authorized otherwise.

                EMPOWERMENT ZONES/ENTERPRISE COMMUNITIES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $15,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        29,850,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       -14,850,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       +15,000,000


    This account provides discretionary grant funding to 15 
urban Enterprise Zones and Enterprise Communities (EZ/ECs) 
designated in Round II.
    The statute that created Round II EZ/ECs did not authorize 
discretionary grant funding for these communities, but instead 
authorized tax incentives to stimulate revitalization efforts 
in these communities. However, since fiscal year 1999, 
discretionary grant funds have been provided under this 
account. Therefore, the Committee recommends $15,000,000 in 
continued grant funding for the 15 urban Round II EZ/ECs.
    Language is included making these funds available for 
obligation for three years, consistent with the funds 
availability provided for other community development 
activities funded within the Department.

                       COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $4,959,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     4,904,909,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request \1\...................     4,716,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +54,091,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......      +227,000,000


\1\ The total does not include a legislative proposal assumed in the
  budget request for a Colonias Gateway Initiative.

    The Community Development Fund provides funding to State 
and local governments, and to other entities that carry out 
community and economic development activities under various 
programs.
    The Committee recommends a total of $4,959,000,000 for the 
Community Development Fund account, a $54,091,000 increase 
above the amount provided in fiscal year 2003. Funding under 
this account is allocated as follows:
          --$4,538,650,000 for Community Development Block 
        Grant formula grants;
          --$72,000,000 for Native American Community 
        Development Block Grants;
          --$33,250,000 for the National Community Development 
        Initiative (NCDI), as follows:
                  $5,000,000 for Habitat for Humanity capacity 
                building activities, of which $750,000 is to be 
                used to expand the ability of Indian tribes to 
                participate in the Self-Help Homeownership 
                Opportunity program and other Habitat for 
                Humanity efforts; and
                  $28,250,000 for the Enterprise Foundation and 
                LISC capacity building activities, including 
                $5,000,000 for activities in rural areas;
          --$43,000,000 for section 107 activities, as follows:
                  $7,000,000 for insular areas;
                  $10,000,000 for Historically Black Colleges 
                and Universities, of which up to $2,000,000 may 
                be used for technical assistance;
                  $3,000,000 for Community Development Work 
                Study;
                  $6,500,000 for Hispanic Serving Institutions;
                  $7,000,000 for Community Outreach 
                Partnerships; and
                  $9,500,000 for the Native Hawaiian Housing 
                Block Grant program
          --$3,300,000 for the Housing Assistance Council;
          --$2,400,000 for the National American Indian Housing 
        Council;
          --$5,000,000 for the National Housing Development 
        Corporation (NHDC), for continuation of its program of 
        acquisition, rehabilitation and preservation of at-risk 
        affordable housing;
          --$5,000,000 for the National Council of La Raza, for 
        its national HOPE Fund to leverage additional 
        investments in affordable housing and community 
        development projects;
          --$28,000,000 for the Self-Help Homeownership 
        Opportunity (SHOP) program, a 12 percent increase over 
        the fiscal year 2003 level;
          --$65,000,000 for Youthbuild, including $2,000,000 
        for capacity building activities, an 8 percent increase 
        over the fiscal year 2003 level;
          --$137,500,000 for economic development initiatives. 
        Language is included in the bill prohibiting funds from 
        being used for operating expenses of a facility, 
        program or organization, and limiting costs associated 
        with grant and project administration to no more than 
        20 percent of the total grant award. The Committee 
        notes projects receiving funding must comply with the 
        environmental review requirements set forth in section 
        305(c) of the Multifamily Housing Property Disposition 
        Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 3547); the Committee will not 
        entertain waivers of this requirement. In addition, 
        funds may not be used for reimbursement of expenses 
        incurred prior to the enactment of the Act providing 
        funding for an economic development initiative. 
        Targeted grants shall be provided as follows:
          1. $25,000 to the 21st Century Council Impact 
        Learning Center in Jackson County, Alabama for 
        completion of facility build out;
          2. $50,000 to the Huntsville Achievement School in 
        Huntsville, Alabama for completion of facility 
        renovations;
          3. $75,000 to the Children's Museum of the Shoals in 
        Florence, Alabama for planning and design of a Native 
        American exhibit;
          4. $75,000 to the Birmingham, Alabama YMCA for 
        construction of a youth center;
          5. $100,000 to Boaz, Alabama for construction and 
        renovation for the Boaz Community Activities Center;
          6. $100,000 to the City of Luverne, Alabama for 
        sidewalks, street furniture and facade improvements;
          7. $100,000 to the Madison County Commission for 
        construction of the Woody Anderson Library in Monrovia, 
        Alabama;
          8. $200,000 to the City of Opelika, Alabama for 
        rehabilitation of the historic Dallas Armory;
          9. $200,000 to the Burritt Center in Huntsville, 
        Alabama for building construction;
          10. $250,000 to Lamar County, Alabama for Industrial 
        Park site development;
          11. $250,000 to Guntersville, Alabama for renovation 
        of the Community Cultural Arts Center;
          12. $300,000 to Wallace Community College in Dothan, 
        Alabama for facilities construction and renovations for 
        the Southeast Alabama Nursing Initiative;
          13. $300,000 to the City of Huntsville, Alabama for 
        streetscape, beautification and greenways improvements;
          14. $400,000 to Arab, Alabama for construction of a 
        senior center;
          15. $500,000 to the National Children's Advocacy 
        Center in Huntsville, Alabama for facilities planning 
        and improvements;
          16. $900,000 to Spring Hill College in Mobile, 
        Alabama for construction of a new library;
          17. $75,000 to Arkansas State University Mountain 
        Home for construction of the Vada Sheid Community 
        Development Center;
          18. $75,000 to the Old Independence Regional Museum 
        in Arkansas for facilities renovation;
          19. $75,000 to Arkansas State University Newport for 
        facilities construction at the commercial driver 
        training range;
          20. $75,000 to the Camden Boys and Girls Club in 
        Camden, Arkansas for construction of recreational 
        facilities;
          21. $75,000 to the City of Conway, Arkansas for 
        building and facade renovation in the downtown;
          22. $75,000 to the Bryant Youth Association in 
        Bryant, Arkansas for land acquisition and construction 
        of a Boys and Girls club facility;
          23. $150,000 to North Arkansas College in Harrison, 
        Arkansas for construction of the Conference and 
        Training Center;
          24. $175,000 to the City of Phoenix, Arizona for 
        design and construction of the Rio Salado Audubon 
        Nature Center;
          25. $200,000 to the Marc Center in Mesa, Arizona for 
        the construction of a day treatment and training center 
        for persons with severe developmental disabilities;
          26. $200,000 to the Boys and Girls Club of 
        Scottsdale, Arizona for facilities construction in 
        Fountain Hills, Arizona;
          27. $200,000 to the Town of Guadalupe, Arizona for 
        construction and renovation to the Mercado shopping 
        center;
          28. $900,000 to the Dunbar Coalition, Inc. for 
        renovation of facilities for the African-American 
        Historical Museum and Cultural Center;
          29. $75,000 to the East Valley YMCA in North 
        Hollywood, California for facilities renovation;
          30. $75,000 to the Valley Family Center in the San 
        Fernando Valley, California for facilities 
        construction;
          31. $75,000 to the Boys and Girls Club of San 
        Fernando Valley, California for facilities renovation;
          32. $75,000 to the Boys and Girls Club of Greater 
        Oxnard and Port Hueneme in California for structural 
        facility improvements;
          33. $75,000 to the City of Oxnard, California for 
        design and construction of an addition to the public 
        library;
          34. $75,000 to Daguhoy Lodge in Stockton, California 
        for facility restoration;
          35. $75,000 to De Anza College in California for 
        planetarium renovation;
          36. $75,000 to the City of Long Beach, California for 
        renovation of the Museum of Latin American Art;
          37. $75,000 to the City of Alhambra, California for 
        renovation of recreational facilities;
          38. $75,000 to the City of Covina, California for 
        renovation of a facility for the homeless;
          39. $75,000 to the City of West Covina, California 
        for construction of a regional community center;
          40. $75,000 to the East San Gabriel Valley Japanese 
        Community Center in California for construction of a 
        social hall;
          41. $90,000 to the City of Fontana, California for 
        acquisition and construction needs at Jack Bulik Park;
          42. $100,000 to the City of Simi Valley, California 
        for buildout and upgrades for the Simi Valley Senior 
        Citizens Center;
          43. $100,000 to North County Solutions for Change for 
        the Futures for Families project to construct regional 
        transitional housing in San Diego, California;
          44. $100,000 to Search to Involve Pilipino Americans 
        in Los Angeles, California for facilities renovation at 
        the Royal Morales Pilipino American Community and 
        Cultural Center;
          45. $100,000 to the Valley Economic Development 
        Center, Inc. in Los Angeles, California for building 
        renovation as part of the Highland Park Commercial 
        Revitalization project;
          46. $100,000 to Santa Clara University in California 
        for planning and design for construction of the 
        ``Information Commons'';
          47. $100,000 to the City of Palo Alto, California for 
        childrens library renovations;
          48. $100,000 to the City of La Puente, California for 
        construction to expand the city's youth learning 
        center;
          49. $100,000 to the County of Los Angeles, California 
        for planning and construction of a cultural and 
        performing arts center at the El Pueblo de Los Angeles 
        State Historic Park;
          50. $100,000 to the City of Huntington Park, 
        California for development of a downtown redevelopment 
        master plan;
          51. $100,000 to ONEgeneration in the San Fernando 
        Valley, California for construction of an 
        intergenerational daycare center;
          52. $100,000 to the City of Oakley, California for 
        construction of a civic center and town square park;
          53. $100,000 to the City of West Sacramento, 
        California for construction of the Collins Teen Center;
          54. $100,000 to the City of Woodland, California for 
        parking construction;
          55. $125,000 to the City of San Jose, California for 
        construction of a youth facility;
          56. $125,000 to the City of Anaheim, California for 
        land acquisition to expand the La Palma Park;
          57. $150,000 to Food Share, Inc. for facilities 
        expansion and construction for a community kitchen in 
        Ventura County, California;
          58. $150,000 to the City of Oceanside, California for 
        construction of a senior citizens center;
          59. $150,000 to the City of Lancaster, California for 
        development of a Regional Youth Baseball Complex;
          60. $150,000 to the City of San Diego, California for 
        streetscape improvements along Rio Drive in the 
        Skyline-Paradise Hills neighborhood;
          61. $150,000 to the Spanish Speaking Unity Council in 
        Oakland, California for design and construction of a 
        parking facility at Fruitvale Transit Village;
          62. $150,000 to the City of Long Beach, California 
        for construction of multi-use facilities at the Steams 
        Park Community Center;
          63. $150,000 to the East Los Angeles YMCA in Los 
        Angeles, California for facilities renovation;
          64. $150,000 to the City of Inglewood, California for 
        design and construction of a senior center;
          65. $150,000 to the City of Lawndale, California for 
        design and construction of a library;
          66. $175,000 to the Rio Linda Union School District 
        in North Highlands, California for construction of the 
        Oakdale Community Center;
          67. $175,000 to Goodwill Industries of Sacramento, 
        California for construction of a community training 
        center;
          68. $200,000 to the City of San Francisco, California 
        for facility renovation to house emancipated foster 
        children;
          69. $225,000 to the City of Corona, California for 
        construction of the Corona Community Center;
          70. $225,000 to the City of Redding, California for 
        property acquisition and site preparation for the 
        Stillwater Business Park;
          71. $225,000 to the City of Adelanto, California for 
        construction of a retail shopping center;
          72. $225,000 to the City of Lancaster, California for 
        construction of public recreation facilities, parking 
        facilities and property acquisition for the North 
        Downtown Transit Village Project;
          73. $225,000 to the City of Diamond Bar, California 
        for construction of a senior center;
          74. $225,000 to the City of Citrus Heights, 
        California for streetscape improvements along the 
        Auburn Boulevard Commercial Corridor;
          75. $225,000 to the Town of Groveland, California for 
        purchase of a youth center;
          76. $225,000 to the Mission Preservation Foundation 
        in San Juan Capistrano, California for the Great Stone 
        Church restoration project;
          77. $225,000 to Sonoma State University in California 
        for construction of the Green Music Center;
          78. $275,000 to the City of Westminster, California 
        for construction of a community cultural and education 
        center;
          79. $275,000 to Kern County, California for 
        infrastructure improvements for the Imperial Way 
        Industrial Park;
          80. $300,000 for Shelter from the Storm, Inc. in Palm 
        Desert, California for facilities renovations and 
        improvements;
          81. $300,000 to the City of Lincoln, California for 
        the design and construction of a Cultural and Business 
        Center;
          82. $300,000 to the City of Santa Monica, California 
        for renovation of a historic structure for use as a 
        visitors center;
          83. $325,000 to the City of Salinas, California for 
        construction of a swimming pool;
          84. $350,000 to the Palomar YMCA in Escondido, 
        California for construction of an aquatics facility;
          85. $350,000 to the International Agri-Center in 
        Tulare, California for improvements to the Heritage 
        Complex Learning Center and to continued construction 
        of a new exhibit pavilion;
          86. $400,000 to the City of Atascadero, California 
        for construction of a Youth Recreation Center;
          87. $450,000 to the City of Monrovia, California site 
        preparation at the Santa Anita and Sawpit Channels for 
        economic development activities;
          88. $450,000 to Los Angeles County, California for 
        the construction of a new library;
          89. $450,000 to the City of La Mesa, California for 
        facilities construction for the La Mesa PARKS Project;
          90. $450,000 to the City of Desert Hot Springs, 
        California for facilities construction for a civic and 
        community center;
          91. $450,000 to the City of Tracy, California for 
        construction of the Tracy Youth Sports Facility;
          92. $1,000,000 to the California Academy of Sciences 
        in San Francisco, California for renovation of its 
        facility;
          93. $275,000 to the City of Aurora, Colorado for 
        facilities renovation and construction for the 
        Fitzsimmons Commons;
          94. $350,000 to the City of Pueblo, Colorado for the 
        Historic Arkansas Riverwalk Project for facilities 
        construction and improvements for ``Gateway Park'';
          95. $90,000 to the University of Hartford in 
        Hartford, Connecticut for building renovation to house 
        the Hartt School Performing Arts Center;
          96. $90,000 to the Wadsworth Athenaeum Museum of Art 
        in Hartford, Connecticut for facility renovation and 
        expansion;
          97. $100,000 to Wesleyan University in Middletown, 
        Connecticut for facilities renovation of a former 
        school;
          98. $100,000 to the Town of North Haven, Connecticut 
        for streetscape improvements in the Montowese area;
          99. $100,000 to the City of West Haven, Connecticut 
        for streetscape improvements along Campbell Avenue;
          100. $200,000 to the Boys and Girls Club of the Lower 
        Naugatuck Valley in Ansonia, Connecticut for facilities 
        renovation;
          101. $225,000 to the Town of Enfield, Connecticut for 
        construction of the Family Resource Center;
          102. $300,000 to the City of Waterbury, Connecticut 
        for demolition and removal of abandoned buildings;
          103. $450,000 to the Charles D. Smith, Jr. Foundation 
        for facilities construction for the Stratfield Avenue 
        Redevelopment Project in Bridgeport, Connecticut;
          104. $200,000 to Arena Stage in Washington, D.C. for 
        design and construction of a new facility;
          105. $275,000 to the Good Samaritan Foundation in the 
        District of Columbia for acquisition and construction 
        of the Anacostia Training and Outreach Center;
          106. $300,000 to Gonzaga High School in Washington, 
        District of Columbia for facilities renovation and 
        construction;
          107. $225,000 to Easter Seals, Delaware and 
        Maryland's Eastern Shore for construction of a new 
        facility in Georgetown, Delaware;
          108. $75,000 to the City of Safety Harbor, Florida 
        for streetscape improvements;
          109. $100,000 to the Sebring Airport Authority, 
        Florida for planning for the development of a light 
        industrial/commercial business park;
          110. $1,000,000 for facilities construction for Tampa 
        Bay Watch in Florida;
          111. $100,000 to the City of St. Petersburg, Florida 
        for facilities expansion for the Museum of History;
          112. $100,000 to Lake Mary, Florida for a downtown 
        development improvement program;
          113. $100,000 to the City of St. Petersburg, Florida 
        for restoration of the Jordan School;
          114. $125,000 to the George Washington Carver 
        Community Center in Crystal River area, Florida for 
        facilities construction;
          115. $150,000 to Mainstreet Fort Pierce, Inc. for the 
        restoration and renovation of the Sunrise Theatre 
        building in Fort Pierce, Florida;
          116. $200,000 to the City of Ocoee, Florida for 
        construction of a senior citizen/veterans services 
        facility;
          117. $200,000 to the City of Clearwater, Florida for 
        the Homeless Intervention Project;
          118. $225,000 to the City of Clearwater, Florida for 
        property acquisition for the Clearwater Homeless 
        Intervention Program, Inc. transitional housing 
        project;
          119. $225,000 to the Bishop Planetarium in Bradenton, 
        Florida for facilities reconstruction and restoration;
          120. $250,000 to Osceola County, Florida for 
        construction of a homeless shelter to be operated by 
        Transition House in Kissimmee, Florida;
          121. $250,000 to St. Cloud, Florida for a special 
        needs evacuation, senior, multipurpose center;
          122. $300,000 to the Mainstreet DeLand Association in 
        DeLand, Florida for the Athens Theatre Renovation 
        project;
          123. $300,000 for facilities expansion of the Dali 
        Museum in St. Petersburg, Florida;
          124. $300,000 for the expansion of Ruth Eckerd Hall 
        in Clearwater, Florida;
          125. $325,000 to Orange County, Florida for 
        construction of a senior center;
          126. $350,000 to Central Florida Community College in 
        Ocala, Florida for construction for an Information 
        Technology Center;
          127. $350,000 to Pinellas County, Florida for the 
        renovation of an aviation high technology facility;
          128. $350,000 to Pinellas County, Florida for 
        facilities construction for a folk cultural center;
          129. $450,000 to the City of Boca Raton, Florida for 
        streetscape improvements for the implementation of the 
        Pearl City Master Plan;
          130. $450,000 to the City of Clearwater, Florida for 
        waterfront facilities construction of the `Beach by 
        Design Initiative';
          131. $500,000 to the City of St. Petersburg, Florida 
        for land acquisition, relocation, demolition and 
        conveyance for the Midtown retail redevelopment 
        project;
          132. $500,000 to the City of St. Petersburg, Florida 
        for Dome Industrial Park facilities renovation and 
        construction;
          133. $800,000 for facilities construction for the 
        Stetson University College of Law, Tampa, Florida 
        campus;
          134. $900,000 to South Florida Goodwill in Miami, 
        Florida for facilities renovations and upgrades;
          135. $900,000 for construction and redevelopment of 
        the Historic Carlington (Roosevelt) Hotel in 
        Jacksonville, Florida to include residential and 
        commercial property;
          136. $900,000 for Eckerd College in St. Petersburg, 
        Florida for the expansion of the Youth Opportunity and 
        Development Center;
          137. $1,400,000 to the City of Dunedin, Florida for 
        construction of recreation center facilities;
          138. $75,000 to the Bishop State Community College in 
        Mobile, Alabama for construction of a business 
        technology center;
          139. $75,000 to the Town of Lumpkin, Georgia for 
        Westville Village's History Alive building restoration;
          140. $75,000 to the City of Richland Downtown 
        Development Authority in Richland, Georgia for 
        renovation of the Old Richland Hotel;
          141. $75,000 to Thomasville, Georgia for Historic 
        Douglas High School Alumni Association Complex 
        renovation;
          142. $75,000 to the University of Georgia for 
        facility buildout to support a program to support 
        southwest Georgia value-added product development;
          143. $75,000 to DeKalb County, Georgia for planning 
        and construction of a senior center;
          144. $75,000 to the City of Macon, Georgia for 
        renovation of the historic Coca-Cola building;
          145. $75,000 to the Tubman Museum, in Macon, Georgia 
        for building construction;
          146. $75,000 to the Clayton County, Georgia Board of 
        Commissioners for planning and construction of a senior 
        center in Jonesboro;
          147. $100,000 to the City of Plains, Georgia for the 
        construction and facilities buildout at the Rural 
        History Resource Center;
          148. $100,000 to Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital in 
        Dougherty County, Georgia for building renovation;
          149. $100,000 to Morehouse School of Medicine in 
        Atlanta, Georgia for land acquisition;
          150. $100,000 to Morehouse College in Atlanta, 
        Georgia for construction of facilities to house the 
        African American Archival Program;
          151. $100,000 to Morehouse College in Atlanta, 
        Georgia for construction of a performing arts center;
          152. $100,000 to Fisk University in Nashville, 
        Tennessee for facilities construction,
          153. $115,000 to Albany, Georgia for renovation and 
        construction at Faith Community Outreach Center, Inc. 
        and renovation of the kitchen at the SOWEGA Council on 
        Aging's Site One Senior Center;
          154. $150,000 to the Joint Development Authority of 
        Ben Hill and Irwin Counties, Georgia for parkland 
        enhancements for Fitzgerald Millennium Technology 
        Pointe;
          155. $160,000 for the Pine Mountain Beautification 
        and Economic Development project in Harris County, 
        Georgia for streetscape improvements;
          156. $225,000 to the City of Monticello, Georgia for 
        recreational facilities improvements and pedestrian 
        pathways for the development of Funderburg Park;
          157. $225,000 to Cobb County, Georgia for 
        construction of the South Cobb Regional Library;
          158. $275,000 to the City of Powder Springs, Georgia 
        for refurbishment of the Coach George E. Ford Center;
          159. $325,000 to the Golden Harvest Food Banks in 
        Augusta, Georgia for facilities construction and 
        improvements for the ``Feed the People'' campaign;
          160. $360,000 to Columbus, Georgia for land 
        acquisition for the Wilson Camp project;
          161. $525,000 to the City of Moultrie, Georgia for 
        demolition and initial construction of the Swift 
        property;
          162. $130,000 to the Waianae, Hawaii YMCA for 
        facilities construction;
          163. $75,000 to the Family Violence Center in Des 
        Moines, Iowa for facilities renovation;
          164. $75,000 to the Town of Grinnell, Iowa for 
        restoration and rehabilitation of downtown buildings;
          165. $150,000 for the North Central Iowa Regional 
        Solid Waste to Energy Facility in Fort Dodge, Iowa for 
        facilities construction;
          166. $450,000 to Systems Unlimited, Inc. located in 
        Iowa City, Iowa for facilities construction;
          167. $225,000 for construction for the Lewis and 
        Clark Bicentennial project in Idaho;
          168. $300,000 to Franklin County, Idaho for the 
        moving, renovation, restoration of the Oneida Stake 
        Academy building in Preston, Idaho;
          169. $700,000 to Idaho State University for 
        facilities construction for the L.E. and Thelma E. 
        Stephens Performing Arts Center;
          170. $100,000 to the University of Idaho for planning 
        and design of the Lionel Hampton Center;
          171. $75,000 to Lawrence Hall Youth Services in 
        Chicago, Illinois for facility construction;
          172. $100,000 for the Tazewell-Woodford Head Start 
        program in East Peoria, Illinois for the continued 
        construction of a new facility;
          173. $100,000 to the Southeast Chicago Development 
        Commission in Chicago, Illinois for building 
        construction for a shopping center;
          174. $125,000 to Knox College in Galesburg, Illinois 
        for Alumni Hall renovations;
          175. $125,000 to Western Illinois University for 
        facility renovation at the Quad City Campus;
          176. $150,000 to the Canal Corridor Association for 
        the Port of LaSalle Project in LaSalle, Illinois 
        including construction of an outdoor interpretive 
        center, a replica mule barn, and construction of a 
        lock-tender's house;
          177. $175,000 to the Chicago Children's Choir Academy 
        in Illinois for facility construction;
          178. $175,000 to the Rebirth of Englewood Community 
        Development Corporation in Chicago, Illinois for 
        purchase and renovation of a building to serve as a 
        community center;
          179. $200,000 to the Dupage County Convalescent 
        Center in Wheaton, Illinois for facilities renovations 
        and improvements;
          180. $200,000 to the Northfield Park District, 
        Illinois for facilities renovation and rehabilitation;
          181. $200,000 to the National Great Rivers Research 
        and Education Center in Illinois for facilities 
        construction;
          182. $225,000 for the Morton Arboretum in Lisle, 
        Illinois for construction of a new visitor center;
          183. $225,000 to Eastern Illinois University for 
        construction of a textbook storage and rental facility;
          184. $225,000 for the Rialto Square Theater in 
        Joliet, Illinois for facilities restoration and 
        improvements;
          185. $250,000 for Lincoln Christian College in 
        Lincoln, Illinois for the restoration of the Earl C. 
        Hargrove Auditorium;
          186. $250,000 to the Village of Homewood, Illinois 
        for purchase and renovation of the Canadian National 
        Railroad Depot;
          187. $250,000 to the Village of Western Springs, 
        Illinois for construction of a storage facility and 
        park amphitheater;
          188. $300,000 to the Marklund Children's Home in 
        Glendale, Heights, Illinois for facilities construction 
        and renovation;
          189. $375,000 to the Ray Graham Association for 
        People with Disabilities located in Downers Grove, 
        Illinois for facilities improvements;
          190. $650,000 to Bradley University in Peoria, 
        Illinois for renovation of Bradley Hall;
          191. $700,000 to the City of DeKalb, Illinois for 
        revitalization of East Lincoln Highway including 
        building rehabilitation, streetscape improvements and 
        beautification;
          192. $1,300,000 to Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's 
        Medical Center in Chicago, Illinois for facilities 
        construction;
          193. $100,000 to the City of Jeffersonville, Indiana 
        for renovation of the Carnegie Library;
          194. $175,000 to the City of Anderson, Indiana for 
        facilities construction of the Anderson Business 
        Development Center;
          195. $175,000 to the City of Indianapolis, Indiana 
        for facade restoration and streetscape along the East 
        Tenth Street corridor;
          196. $200,000 to the African American Achievers Youth 
        Corporation in Gary, Indiana for renovation of the Glen 
        Theater;
          197. $300,000 to the University of Saint Francis in 
        Fort Wayne, Indiana for construction and buildout of 
        the proposed Professional Development Center;
          198. $400,000 to the City of South Bend, Indiana for 
        site acquisition and demolition for the Studebaker 
        Corridor redevelopment initiative;
          199. $500,000 to the James Whitcombe Riley Hospital 
        for Children in Indianapolis, Indiana for the expansion 
        and renovation of the Children's Emergency and Trauma 
        Center;
          200. $600,000 to North Township, Indiana for 
        renovation and construction of recreational facilities, 
        parking, lighting and landscaping improvements at 
        Wicker Memorial Park;
          201. $120,000 to the City of Topeka, Kansas for 
        development of the Shawnee County Industrial Park;
          202. $150,000 to Catholic Housing of Wyandotte 
        County, Kansas for renovation of the St. Mary's Church 
        for reuse as part of the St. Peter/Waterway 
        Redevelopment Project;
          203. $175,000 to the Wichita Art Museum in Wichita, 
        Kansas for facilities renovation, construction and 
        improvements for the second Art Investigation Gallery;
          204. $200,000 to Sedan, Kansas for renovation of the 
        historic Bradford Hotel;
          205. $275,000 to the Smokey Hill Education Service 
        Center in Salina, Kansas for technology upgrades;
          206. $275,000 to the City of Topeka, Kansas for land 
        acquisition, facilities improvements and pedestrian 
        trails for the Great Overland Station Riverfront Park;
          207. $75,000 to the Louisville Jefferson County 
        Metropolitan Government, Kentucky for the renovation of 
        the Sun Valley Community Center;
          208. $100,000 to the LaRue County Fiscal Court, 
        Kentucky to study the feasibility of creating a 
        visitors center for the area;
          209. $100,000 to the Fivco Area Development District 
        in Kentucky for construction of a multipurpose facility 
        at EastPark;
          210. $100,000 for North Star Productions, Inc. in 
        Bracken County, Kentucky for construction of an 
        amphitheater;
          211. $200,000 to the City of Renfro Valley, Kentucky 
        for construction of a municipal conference and civic 
        center;
          212. $225,000 for the Trinity Family Life Center in 
        Louisville, Kentucky for continued facilities 
        construction;
          213. $225,000 to Cumberland College in Williamsburg, 
        Kentucky for construction of a campus technology 
        facility;
          214. $225,000 to the London-Laurel County Tourism 
        Committee, Kentucky for construction of the Blue-Gray 
        Civil War Theme Park;
          215. $225,000 to Casey County, Kentucky for 
        development and engineering for the Agricultural and 
        Exposition Center;
          216. $450,000 to the Center for Rural Development in 
        Somerset, Kentucky for facilities renovation and 
        expansion;
          217. $700,000 to the Louisville Medical Center 
        Development Corporation for property acquisition for 
        development of a research park in Louisville, Kentucky;
          218. $50,000 to St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana for 
        construction of a veterans memorial;
          219. $75,000 to the Downtown Development District in 
        New Orleans, Louisiana for sidewalk replacements and 
        enhancements;
          220. $75,000 to the Town of Ferriday, Louisiana for 
        Main Street streetscape work;
          221. $75,000 to Alexandria and Pineville, Louisiana 
        for an economic revitalization study focused on the Red 
        River waterfront;
          222. $200,000 to the Amistad Research Center at 
        Tulane University in New Orleans, Louisiana for 
        facilities restoration of the Tilden Library to house 
        Center records;
          223. $200,000 to the City of DeQuincy, Louisiana for 
        building renovation, land acquisition, streetscape and 
        fagade improvements;
          224. $225,000 to the Town of New Roads, Louisiana 
        facilities construction and renovation, and sidewalks, 
        street furniture and fagade improvements;
          225. $450,000 to the National Center for Community 
        Renewal for facilities renovation and expansion in 
        Shreveport, Louisiana;
          226. $450,000 to the Audubon Nature Institute for 
        facilities construction in Baton Rouge and New Orleans, 
        Louisiana;
          227. $50,000 to the Chelsea Green Space and 
        Recreation Committee in Massachusetts for construction 
        of a park, including a boardwalk and benches;
          228. $75,000 to the Town of Randolph, Massachusetts 
        for the rehabilitation of the historic Stetson Town 
        Hall;
          229. $100,000 to the Roxbury Boys and Girls Club in 
        Roxbury, Massachusetts for renovation of the Roxbury 
        Clubhouse;
          230. $100,000 to Salem State College in Salem, 
        Massachusetts for construction of a theatre;
          231. $100,000 to the Essex National Heritage 
        Commission for Community Resource in Massachusetts for 
        development of a plan for a visitors services and 
        archives center;
          232. $135,000 to the City of Worchester, 
        Massachusetts for land acquisition and building 
        renovations in the Gardner-Kilby-Hammond neighborhood;
          233. $175,000 to the Lawrence, Massachusetts Boys and 
        Girls Club for recreational facilities renovations;
          234. $200,000 to the City of Springfield, 
        Massachusetts for design development and renovation of 
        an existing public market;
          235. $200,000 to Springfield College, in Springfield, 
        Massachusetts for planning and construction of a field 
        house;
          236. $200,000 to North Adams, Massachusetts for 
        renovation of the North Adams Armory into a community 
        center;
          237. $200,000 to Greenfield, Massachusetts for 
        renovation of the First National Bank Building;
          238. $350,000 to the Massachusetts College of 
        Pharmacy and Health Sciences in Worcester, 
        Massachusetts for construction of new multi-use 
        education facilities;
          239. $75,000 to the City of Rockville, Maryland for 
        construction of a park at King Mill;
          240. $90,000 to the Melwood Horticultural Training 
        Center in Prince Georges County, Maryland for 
        facilities renovation;
          241. $100,000 to the City of District Heights, 
        Maryland for facade and building renovation in the 
        city's commercial area;
          242. $100,000 to the Boys and Girls Club of Greater 
        Washington in Silver Spring, Maryland for purchase of 
        the D.C. Metropolitan Police Boys and Girls Club 
        facility;
          243. $150,000 to the Olney Theatre for the Arts in 
        Olney, Maryland for construction of a theater;
          244. $160,000 to the Bowie Regional Arts Vision 
        Association in Bowie, Maryland for construction of a 
        new community theater;
          245. $175,000 to the 20th Street H.O.P.E. House in 
        Baltimore, Maryland for facilities expansion and 
        renovation;
          246. $200,000 to Mt. Ranier, Maryland for facilities 
        rehabilitation in the Gateway Arts District;
          247. $350,000 for the National Federation of the 
        Blind Research and Training Institute in Baltimore, 
        Maryland for facilities construction;
          248. $75,000 to the Maine Environmental Research 
        Institute (MERI) in Blue Hill, Maine for facilities 
        renovation;
          249. $75,000 to Rumford Hospital in Maine for 
        facility renovation;
          250. $150,000 to the People's Regional Opportunity 
        Program in Portland, Maine for construction of a 
        community center in the Parkside neighborhood;
          251. $100,000 for St. Mary's College in Orchard Lake, 
        Michigan for renovation of library and dormitory 
        facilities;
          252. $125,000 for Lawrence Tech in Southfield, 
        Michigan for facilities renovation and enhancements for 
        the Center for Innovative Materials for Infrastructure 
        Security;
          253. $125,000 for the Michigan Jewish Institute for 
        construction, buildout, and equipment for the College 
        Academic Center;
          254. $125,000 to Genesee County, Michigan for land 
        acquisition in support of the Genesee County Land 
        Reutilization Plan, in collaboration with the City of 
        Flint;
          255. $175,000 to the City of Detroit, Michigan for 
        demolition of abandoned housing stock;
          256. $175,000 to the City of Detroit, Michigan for 
        design and construction of the Belle Isle Natural Zoo;
          257. $200,000 for Boysville of Michigan for 
        renovations and upgrades at various locations;
          258. $200,000 to the National Center for 
        Manufacturing Sciences in Ann Arbor, Michigan for 
        facilities improvements and buildout related to the 
        development and deployment of advanced technologies to 
        the manufacturing base;
          259. $200,000 to Focus: HOPE in Detroit, Michigan for 
        renovation of the New Central Warehouse;
          260. $200,000 to the Arab Community Center for 
        Economic and Social Services in Dearborn, Michigan for 
        construction of an Arab American National Museum and 
        Cultural Center;
          261. $225,000 to Cleary University in Howell, 
        Michigan for construction of the Center for Business 
        and Community Excellence;
          262. $225,000 to the City of Menominee, Michigan for 
        renovation of recreational facilities;
          263. $300,000 to Mercy Hospital Cadillac in Cadillac, 
        Michigan for facilities construction and renovations 
        for the Healthcare Improvement and Access Initiative;
          264. $450,000 for Automotion Alley for facilities 
        construction, improvements and buildout for a 
        Technology Center in Troy, Michigan;
          265. $75,000 to Chicanos Latinos En Servicio (CLUES) 
        in St. Paul, Minnesota for facility construction;
          266. $100,000 to the Audubon Center of the North 
        Woods in Minnesota for facilities construction and 
        renovation;
          267. $100,000 to Leech Lake Tribal College in 
        Minnesota for planning and site development for 
        establishment of a new campus;
          268. $125,000 to Fond Du Lac Tribal and Community 
        College in Minnesota for design and construction of a 
        multi-use facility;
          269. $150,000 to the Minneapolis American Indian 
        Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota for facility 
        renovation and construction;
          270. $150,000 to the Greater Minneapolis Council of 
        Churches in North Minneapolis, Minnesota for 
        construction of the Center for Families;
          271. $150,000 to the Northside Residents 
        Redevelopment Council in Minneapolis, Minnesota for 
        building construction;
          272. $150,000 to the Labor Interpretive Center in 
        Minnesota for construction of a memorial;
          273. $225,000 to the Redwood County Agricultural 
        Society in Minnesota for fairground grandstand 
        renovation and construction of facilities;
          274. $275,000 to Dakota County, Minnesota for land 
        acquisition for open space preservation;
          275. $60,000 to the City of Joplin, Missouri for a 
        feasibility study and facilities improvements for the 
        restoration of the Joplin Union Depot;
          276. $75,000 to the City of St. Louis, Missouri for 
        restoration of the Eugene Field House;
          277. $100,000 to the City of St. Louis, Missouri for 
        streetscape improvements;
          278. $100,000 to St. Louis County, Missouri for 
        streetscape improvements;
          279. $100,000 to Jefferson County, Missouri for 
        streetscape improvements along Jeffco Boulevard;
          280. $100,000 to the Liberty Memorial Museum in 
        Kansas City, Missouri for museum renovation;
          281. $100,000 to the City of Kansas City, Missouri 
        for streetscape improvements in the Union Hill 
        District;
          282. $175,000 to the City of Cape Girardeau, Missouri 
        for the painting of a mural on the Cape Girardeau, 
        Missouri flood wall;
          283. $225,000 to the Show-Me Aquatics and Fitness 
        Center in O'Fallon, Missouri for land acquisition and 
        facilities construction;
          284. $225,000 to the Missouri Soybean Association for 
        the purchase of a building for use as an Incubation 
        Center in Kansas City, Missouri;
          285. $900,000 to the City of Springfield, Missouri 
        for construction of a community multipurpose facility;
          286. $100,000 to the Town of Bolton Development 
        Corporation in Bolton, Mississippi for acquisition and 
        renovation of a multipurpose community facility;
          287. $150,000 to Harrison County, Mississippi for 
        construction of waterfront facilities;
          288. $325,000 to the City of Meridian, Mississippi 
        for renovation of the Grand Opera House;
          289. $325,000 to the Yoknapatawpha Arts Council in 
        Oxford, Mississippi for facilities renovation;
          290. $300,000 to the Yellowstone Boys and Girls Ranch 
        in Billings, Montana for facilities construction and 
        renovations;
          291. $75,000 to CAARE, Inc. in Durham County, North 
        Carolina for construction, renovation and buildout of a 
        one-stop service center for individuals affected by 
        HIV/AIDS;
          292. $100,000 to the City of Greenville, North 
        Carolina for building demolition and building 
        renovation in the West Greenville neighborhood;
          293. $100,000 to the North Carolina Institute of 
        Minority Economic for restoration, renovation and 
        buildout of a building in downtown Durham, North 
        Carolina;
          294. $125,000 to North Carolina Community Development 
        Initiative Capital, Inc. for capitalization of a loan 
        fund;
          295. $125,000 to the Food Bank of North Carolina for 
        renovation and buildout of a food bank facility;
          296. $125,000 to Bennett College in Greensboro, North 
        Carolina for renovation of residence halls;
          297. $135,000 to Bladen's Bloomin' Agri-Industrial, 
        Inc. in Bladen County, North Carolina for construction 
        of a business incubator;
          298. $150,000 to the North Carolina Community 
        Development Initiative for acquisition of property;
          299. $175,000 to the City of Raleigh, North Carolina 
        for reuse planning for the Fayetteville Street Mall and 
        for streetscape improvements, pedestrian benches, 
        street lights, tree planting, entertainment space 
        construction and water fountain construction;
          300. $200,000 to the Town of Wadesboro, North 
        Carolina for facilities renovations to the Ansonia 
        Theatre;
          301. $200,000 to the City of Durham, North Carolina 
        for revitalizing Historic Parrish Street, including 
        facilities construction/renovation and buildout; 
        economic development planning assistance; sidewalks, 
        street furniture, and facade improvements; and land 
        acquisition;
          302. $200,000 to the Grape Arbor Development 
        Corporation for construction and buildout of a Youth 
        Enhancement Center;
          303. $200,000 to North Carolina Central University 
        for construction, buildout, and equipment for a 
        bioprocessing research institute;
          304. $225,000 to Mayland Community College in Spruce 
        Pine, North Carolina for facilities renovations for the 
        Lexington project;
          305. $225,000 to the Graveyard of the Atlantic Museum 
        in Hatteras, North Carolina for facilities 
        construction;
          306. $250,000 to the Central Piedmont Community 
        College American Academy of Applied Forensics in 
        Charlotte, North Carolina for facilities construction;
          307. $275,000 to the Town of Troy, North Carolina for 
        a pilot program for the construction of affordable 
        housing;
          308. $675,000 to the Pisgah Forest Institute at 
        Brevard College in Brevard, North Carolina for 
        facilities construction;
          309. $175,000 to Sitting Bull College on the Standing 
        Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota for facilities 
        planning and construction;
          310. $325,000 to Girls and Boys Town of Boys Town, 
        Nebraska for the national priority projects of Girls 
        and Boys Town USA;
          311. $450,000 for Falls City, Nebraska for the 
        development of infrastructure for an industrial park;
          312. $450,000 to the Boys and Girls Home of Nebraska 
        for renovation of the Columbus Community Hospital in 
        Columbus, Nebraska;
          313. $80,000 for the Lancaster Main Street Program in 
        Lancaster, New Hampshire for facilities renovations and 
        improvements for the Great North Woods Welcome Center;
          314. $225,000 for the Nashua Senior Activity Center 
        in Nashua, New Hampshire for facilities expansion and 
        renovation;
          315. $75,000 to Ujima Ministries, Inc. in Mercer 
        County, New Jersey for facilities construction;
          316. $75,000 to the County of Hunterdon, New Jersey 
        for design and construction of a senior center;
          317. $100,000 to Rowan University in Mantua, New 
        Jersey for facilities construction and renovation for 
        the Southern Jersey Technology Park;
          318. $125,000 to the Essex County Environmental 
        Center in Roseland, New Jersey for renovation and 
        construction to accommodate facilities expansion;
          319. $175,000 to the University of Medicine and 
        Dentistry of New Jersey for facilities expansion to 
        support the Geriatric Research Center;
          320. $200,000 to the City of North Wildwood, New 
        Jersey for facilities improvements for the beach, 
        boardwalk and entertainment district;
          321. $200,000 to Hamilton Township, New Jersey for 
        building demolition and renovations for the American 
        Metro Center;
          322. $200,000 to Brookdale Community College in Wall 
        Township, New Jersey for rehabilitation and remodeling 
        of buildings at the New Jersey Coastal Communiversity;
          323. $200,000 to the Jersey City Medical Center in 
        New Jersey for construction;
          324. $225,000 to the Morris Area YMCA, Morris County, 
        New Jersey for facilities construction and renovation;
          325. $225,000 to the Somerset Hills YMCA in Basking 
        Ridge, New Jersey for facilities construction and 
        renovation;
          326. $225,000 to Ramapo College of New Jersey for 
        construction of the Bill Bradley Sports and Recreation 
        Center;
          327. $225,000 to the Hammonton Revitalization 
        Corporation in Hammonton, New Jersey for property 
        acquisition and streetscape improvements for the 
        Mainstreet Hammonton Project;
          328. $225,000 to Rutgers University in New Jersey for 
        land acquisition for LEAP University High School;
          329. $250,000 to the Edison Preservation Foundation 
        in New Jersey for building rehabilitation;
          330. $300,000 to the Township of Mount Holly, New 
        Jersey,. for an economic planning study for the Mount 
        Holly bypass corridor ($50,000) and for construction of 
        affordable housing units ($250,000);
          331. $380,000 to the Borough of North Arlington, New 
        Jersey for sidewalk, curbs and facade improvements in 
        the Morton Avenue neighborhood;
          332. $100,000 to the Hubbard Museum of the American 
        West located in Ruidoso, New Mexico for facilities 
        expansion;
          333. $100,000 to Rio Arriba County, New Mexico for 
        construction of a community center;
          334. $225,000 to the Wheels Museum, Inc. for planning 
        and land acquisition;
          335. $75,000 to the City of Las Vegas, Nevada for 
        renovation of a post office for reuse;
          336. $75,000 to the City of North Las Vegas, Nevada 
        for planning and construction of a public library;
          337. $200,000 to the City of Henderson, Nevada for 
        the purchase and renovation of buildings to revitalize 
        the downtown area;
          338. $225,000 to the City of Sparks, Nevada for 
        rehabilitation of the Deer Park Pool facilities;
          339. $60,000 to the Town of Niagara, New York to 
        complete buildout of a community center;
          340. $75,000 to Eastern Long Island Hospital in 
        Greenport, New York for facilities renovation;
          341. $75,000 to the Town of Brookhaven, New York for 
        construction of the Gorden Heights Community Center;
          342. $75,000 to the Broome County Jewish Community 
        Center in Binghamton, New York for renovation and 
        construction of an early childhood development center;
          343. $75,000 to the United Cerebral Palsy Association 
        of Greater Suffolk, Inc. in Suffolk County, New York 
        for land acquisition;
          344. $75,000 to the Town of Freeport, New York for 
        renovations of buildings;
          345. $75,000 to the Town of North Hempstead for 
        streetscape, facade and building renovation in the 
        hamlet of New Cassel;
          346. $75,000 to the Cross Island YMCA of Queens, New 
        York for facilities expansion and renovation;
          347. $75,000 to the Jamaica YMCA of Jamaica in New 
        York, New York for facilities expansion and renovation;
          348. $75,000 to 1409 Enterprises, Inc. in Buffalo, 
        New York for facilities renovation;
          349. $80,000 to Wayne County, New York for relocation 
        of and renovations to the Wolcott Carriage House;
          350. $80,000 to the Castle Hill, Bronx, New York YMCA 
        for facilities construction;
          351. $100,000 to the Staten Island Economic 
        Development Corporation located in New York for 
        completion of an updated Overall Economic Development 
        Plan;
          352. $100,000 to the Metropolitan Development 
        Association in Syracuse, New York for the VISION 2010 
        Economic Development plan;
          353. $100,000 to Wayne County, New York for a 
        feasibility study on the planned reuse of the surplus 
        real estate of the Newark Developmental Center Area;
          354. $100,000 to the City of Syracuse, New York for 
        renovations to the Redhouse Theater;
          355. $100,000 to the Gloria Wise Boys and Girls Club 
        in the Bronx, New York for facilities renovation;
          356. $100,000 to the Town of Greenburgh, New York for 
        expansion and renovation of a public library;
          357. $100,000 to the Village of Hastings-on-Hudson, 
        New York for renovations to a senior and youth 
        community center;
          358. $100,000 to the Village of Briarcliff Manor, New 
        York for streetscape improvements;
          359. $100,000 to the Regional Foodbank of 
        Northeastern New York for construction and renovation 
        of facilities;
          360. $100,000 to the 59th Street Recreation Center in 
        New York, New York for facilities renovation;
          361. $100,000 to the City of New York's Department of 
        Parks and Recreation for construction of a nature 
        center in Crotona Park;
          362. $125,000 to the Village of Saugerties, New York 
        for streetscape including sidewalk replacement;
          363. $125,000 to the Town of Sleepy Hollow, New York 
        for construction of a new senior center;
          364. $125,000 to the City of Yonkers, New York for 
        renovation of the Nepperhan Valley Technology Center;
          365. $125,000 to Alianza Dominicana Inc. in New York, 
        New York for facilities construction;
          366. $125,000 to Boricua College in New York for 
        building renovation;
          367. $125,000 to the Washington Heights' Armory 
        Foundation for facilities renovations;
          368. $140,000 to the Broadway Market Management Corp. 
        in Buffalo, New York for renovation of the Broadway 
        Market;
          369. $150,000 to the Staten Island University 
        Hospital for the construction of the Regina McGinn 
        Education Center in New York;
          370. $150,000 to On Your Mark in Staten Island, New 
        York for facilities renovations for a community center;
          371. $150,000 to the Town of Lancaster, New York for 
        construction activities of the Landmark Clock project;
          372. $150,000 to the Village of Owego, New York for 
        construction of a community center;
          373. $150,000 to LaGuardia Community College in New 
        York for facilities renovation to house a small 
        business incubator;
          374. $150,000 to the Brooklyn Public Library in New 
        York for restoration of the central plaza;
          375. $200,000 to the Elizabeth Pierce Olmsted Center 
        in Cheektowaga, New York for construction of an 
        affordable housing project for handicapped individuals 
        with an emphasis on individuals with visual 
        impairments;
          376. $200,000 to the City of Syracuse, New York for 
        renovation of the Girls Inc. building;
          377. $200,000 to Onondaga County, New York for 
        restoration of the Nine Mile Creek Aqueduct in 
        Camillus, New York;
          378. $200,000 to the Hebrew Academy for Special 
        Children in Brooklyn, New York for construction and 
        renovation of a facility;
          379. $200,000 to Schenectady, New York for expansion 
        of Proctor's Theatre;
          380. $200,000 to the Greater Ridgewood Restoration 
        Corporation in New York for streetscape improvements 
        along the Brooklyn/Queens border;
          381. $225,000 to Putnam County, New York for 
        streetscape improvements along the Rt. 52 Corridor;
          382. $225,000 to the City of Long Beach, New York for 
        the Reynolds Channel Waterfront Rediscovery Project for 
        construction of a Marine Environment Center, pedestrian 
        trails, and recreational facilities;
          383. $225,000 to D'Youville College in Buffalo, New 
        York for facilities renovation, expansion and buildout 
        for the D'Youville College Library Improvement project;
          384. $250,000 to the City of Syracuse, New York for 
        renovations to a stone building in Elmwood Park;
          385. $250,000 to the City of Syracuse, New York for 
        facilities renovation of the Open Hand Theater;
          386. $250,000 to Onondaga County, New York for 
        construction and expansion of the North Area YMCA;
          387. $250,000 to the State University of New York 
        Environmental School of Forestry for facility 
        renovations and improvements in Onondaga Park;
          388. $250,000 to the City of Syracuse, New York for 
        Automobile Row streetscape improvements;
          389. $275,000 to the Natural History Museum of the 
        Adirondacks for construction of a new museum;
          390. $280,000 to the Bedford-Stuyvesant YMCA in 
        Brooklyn, New York for renovation and construction of a 
        youth and family center;
          391. $300,000 to Houghton College, New York for 
        renovation of the Paine Science Center;
          392. $300,000 to Wayne County, New York for 
        demolition and facilities construction improvements at 
        Sodus Point Park;
          393. $350,000 to Per Scholas: Workforce Enterprise 
        Service in the Bronx, New York for renovation of 
        warehouse space to house the WorkSmart program;
          394. $375,000 to the Town of Babylon, New York for 
        facilities construction for the redevelopment of Oak 
        Beach Park;
          395. $400,000 to the Mary Mitchell Family and Youth 
        Center in the Bronx, New York for construction of the 
        Austin Jacobo Center for Community Leadership;
          396. $450,000 to the State University of New York 
        College of Environmental Science and Forestry for the 
        acquisition, renovation and construction of facilities 
        for the North Country Campus Economic Development and 
        Improvement Program in Clayton, New York;
          397. $450,000 to the Belmont Shelter Corporation for 
        the construction of the Shawnee Landing Senior 
        Apartments in Wheatfield, New York;
          398. $450,000 to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 
        New York City for facade restoration improvements;
          399. $450,000 to Jazz at Lincoln Center in New York 
        City for facilities construction;
          400. $450,000 to the New York Public Library in New 
        York City for renovations to their Map Division;
          401. $500,000 to Onondaga County, New York for 
        renovations to the Fayetteville Library;
          402. $500,000 to the City of Syracuse, New York for 
        facilities restoration and expansion of the Landmark 
        Theater;
          403. $500,000 to the WXXI Public Broadcasting Council 
        in Rochester, New York for facilities construction and 
        improvements for an Educational Outreach Center;
          404. $500,000 to Wayne County, New York to construct 
        a new Livestock building at the Wayne County 
        fairgrounds;
          405. $675,000 to the New York Olympic Regional 
        Development Authority for facilities construction for 
        the Mount Van Hoevenberg Olympics Sports Complex;
          406. $1,000,000 to Nazareth College in Rochester, New 
        York for renovations of their Academic Center;
          407. $1,350,000 to Utica College of Syracuse in 
        Utica, New York for design and construction for the 
        expansion of science facilities;
          408. $75,000 to the City of Lorain, Ohio for land 
        acquisition for the Central Lorain Neighborhood 
        Redevelopment project;
          409. $75,000 to the Akron City Hospital in Akron, 
        Ohio for facility construction;
          410. $75,000 to the Southside Community Development 
        Corporation in Youngstown, Ohio for renovation of the 
        former Southside Medical Center;
          411. $100,000 for Jamestown, Ohio to renovate the 
        Jamestown Opera House;
          412. $100,000 to Tuscarawas County, Ohio for 
        infrastructure for an industrial park;
          413. $100,000 to Ross County, Ohio for construction 
        of a regional multipurpose facility in Chillicothe, 
        Ohio;
          414. $100,000 to the Center for Families and Children 
        in Cleveland, Ohio for design and construction of a 
        medical campus;
          415. $100,000 to COMPASS Toledo in Toledo, Ohio for 
        facilities rehabilitation;
          416. $100,000 to Ohio Theatre, Inc. in Toledo, Ohio 
        for marquee and facade rehabilitation of the Ohio 
        Theatre;
          417. $100,000 to North River Development Corporation 
        in Toledo, Ohio for economic development planning for 
        the Galena Street Redevelopment Project;
          418. $100,000 to the Bay Area Neighborhood 
        Development Corporation in Sandusky, Ohio for 
        facilities improvements and construction in blighted 
        areas;
          419. $125,000 to the Ottawa Community Development 
        Corporation in Toledo, Ohio for building construction 
        and renovation along Monroe Street;
          420. $125,000 to the East Toledo Family Center in 
        Toledo, Ohio for building renovations;
          421. $150,000 to the City of Marietta, Ohio for 
        construction of a community recreation center;
          422. $200,000 to the City of Oberlin, Ohio for 
        construction to support the East College Street 
        Project;
          423. $200,000 to the City of Toledo, Ohio for 
        renovation of a community recreation facility;
          424. $200,000 to the J. Frank Troy Senior Center in 
        Toledo, Ohio for renovation and construction;
          425. $225,000 to the Dayton/Montgomery County Port 
        Authority, Ohio for land acquisition, demolition, and 
        site development for a commercial office center at 
        Patterson Place;
          426. $275,000 to the City of St. Clairsville, Ohio 
        for restoration of the Clarendon Hotel;
          427. $300,000 for Ohio Wesleyan University to 
        renovate Merrick Hall;
          428. $300,000 for Catholic Social Services in 
        Springfield, Ohio for renovation of a facility to house 
        the Second Harvest Foodbank;
          429. $300,000 for the Springfield Arts Council for 
        renovation of the Veterans Park Amphitheater in 
        Springfield, Ohio;
          430. $350,000 to the Cincinnati Museum Center in 
        Cincinnati, Ohio for restoration and expansion of 
        facilities;
          431. $350,000 to Lake Erie College in Painesville, 
        Ohio for construction of an athletic and wellness 
        center;
          432. $450,000 to the Portsmouth Area Chamber of 
        Commerce in Portsmouth, Ohio for construction of the 
        Sciot County Welcome Center;
          433. $2,100,000 to the City of Canton, Ohio for 
        property acquisition;
          434. $150,000 to the Heartland of American Foundation 
        for facilities construction for the Heartland of 
        America Museum in Weatherford, Oklahoma;
          435. $150,000 to Area Neighbors in Wagoner, Oklahoma 
        for facilities construction;
          436. $225,000 to the Lawton/Fort Sill Chamber of 
        Commerce and Industry in Lawton, Oklahoma for 
        construction of the National Army Museum of the 
        Southwest;
          437. $225,000 to the Standing Bear Museum and 
        Education Center in Ponca City, Oklahoma for facilities 
        construction;
          438. $75,000 to Douglas County, Oregon for 
        construction of a community recreation pavilion at the 
        Marina RV Resort;
          439. $75,000 to the City of Albany, Oregon for 
        construction of the Swanson Family Aquatic Center;
          440. $90,000 to the City of Portland, Oregon for 
        Portland Central City streetscape and neighborhood 
        integration planning;
          441. $100,000 to the City of Springfield, Oregon for 
        renovation of the Richard E. Wildish Community Theater;
          442. $100,000 to the City of Portland, Oregon for 
        architectural and engineering design for the Portland 
        Public Market;
          443. $125,000 to the City of Salem, Oregon for 
        construction of a civic center;
          444. $275,000 for Union and Wallowa Counties, Oregon 
        for purchase of a railroad line for tourism 
        development;
          445. $50,000 to the City of McKeesport, Pennsylvania 
        to complete refurbishment of the Riverview Playground;
          446. $75,000 to the Penn-Brad Oil Museum in Bradford, 
        Pennsylvania for facilities improvements and 
        landscaping;
          447. $75,000 to the City of Philadelphia, 
        Pennsylvania for Blue Horizon facade restoration;
          448. $75,000 to the Rock School in Philadelphia, 
        Pennsylvania for facilities renovation;
          449. $75,000 to the Pittsburgh Urban Redevelopment 
        Authority in Pennsylvania for land acquisition in the 
        Larimer neighborhood;
          450. $75,000 to the Bloomfield Garfield Corporation 
        in Pennsylvania for renovation of the St. Joseph's 
        Nursing Home for reuse;
          451. $75,000 to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania for land 
        acquisition for the expansion of Frick Park;
          452. $75,000 to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania for property 
        acquisition along the Centre Avenue Corridor;
          453. $100,000 to the Borough of Morrisville, 
        Pennsylvania for a redevelopment study;
          454. $100,000 to the Hepatitis B Foundation in 
        conjunction with Delaware Valley College for the 
        planning and design of a Biotechnology Research Complex 
        in the Philadelphia suburbs of Bucks County, 
        Pennsylvania;
          455. $100,000 to the National Trust for Historic 
        Gettysburg, Pennsylvania for restoration of the 
        Majestic Theater;
          456. $100,000 to the Strand-Capitol Performing Arts 
        Center in York City, Pennsylvania for facilities 
        renovation;
          457. $100,000 to the Sultan Ahmad Community 
        Foundation in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for community 
        center construction;
          458. $100,000 to ONUNDE, Inc of Philadelphia, 
        Pennsylvania for facility construction;
          459. $100,000 to the Absalom Jones Foundation in 
        Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for renovation of the 
        Historic Grand Lodge;
          460. $100,000 to the Philadelphia Dance Company in 
        Pennsylvania for renovation of performance facilities;
          461. $100,000 to the Greater Germantown Housing 
        Development Corporation in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 
        for renovations to buildings;
          462. $100,000 to the Parkside Historic Preservation 
        Corporation in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for 
        renovations to buildings;
          463. $100,000 to Cheltenham Township, Pennsylvania 
        for renovations to buildings;
          464. $100,000 to Mt. Airy USA in Philadelphia, 
        Pennsylvania for renovations to buildings;
          465. $100,000 to the Beech Capital Venture 
        Corporation in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for 
        renovations to buildings;
          466. $100,000 to Mercy-Douglass Center of 
        Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for facilities renovation;
          467. $100,000 to the Borough of Jenkintown, 
        Pennsylvania for renovation of a theater;
          468. $100,000 to the Borough of Minersville, 
        Pennsylvania for streetscape improvements;
          469. $100,000 to the Seldom Seen Mine in Patton, 
        Pennsylvania for facilities renovations to permit 
        display of equipment;
          470. $125,000 to the City of Lebanon, Pennsylvania 
        for demolition and building restoration;
          471. $125,000 to the City of Lebanon, Pennsylvania 
        for construction of recreation facilities for the 
        Lebanon Valley Family YMCA;
          472. $125,000 to the City of Pittston, Pennsylvania 
        for land acquisition, facilities renovation and 
        demolition;
          473. $125,000 to the City of Scranton, Pennsylvania 
        for land acquisition, facilities renovation and 
        demolition;
          474. $150,000 to the Pennridge Senior Center for the 
        planning, design, and construction of a senior center 
        in Perkasie, Pennsylvania;
          475. $150,000 to the Borough of Donora, Pennsylvania 
        for construction of a pavilion at Palmer Park;
          476. $200,000 to Indiana University of Pennsylvania 
        for construction of an on-campus multi-use facility;
          477. $200,000 to the Borough of Northern Cambria, 
        Pennsylvania for construction of a community recreation 
        center;
          478. $200,000 to Fayette County, Pennsylvania for 
        renovation of the Wellness and Research Center;
          479. $200,000 to Greene County, Pennsylvania for 
        renovation of a community center;
          480. $200,000 to Mount Aloysius College in 
        Pennsylvania for renovation of Alumni Hall;
          481. $225,000 to the Phoenixville Area Economic 
        Development Corporation for restoration of the 
        Phoenixville Foundry building in Phoenixville Borough, 
        Pennsylvania;
          482. $225,000 for the Vietnam Veterans Leadership 
        Program of Western Pennsylvania for acquisition or 
        facilities construction;
          483. $225,000 to the Westmoreland County Industrial 
        Development Corporation for property acquisition and 
        demolition for the Jeannette, Pennsylvania Downtown 
        Redevelopment Plan;
          484. $250,000 to the Urban Education Research and 
        Retreat Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for 
        facility renovations at the 4601 Market Street 
        Building;
          485. $250,000 to the City of Lower Burrell, 
        Pennsylvania for construction of recreational 
        facilities at Community Park, including a pavilion;
          486. $250,000 to Seton Hill College in Greensburg, 
        Pennsylvania for construction of recreational 
        facilities;
          487. $300,000 to the Borough of Brownsville, 
        Pennsylvania for building renovation;
          488. $300,000 to Washington & Jefferson College in 
        Washington, Pennsylvania for renovation of downtown 
        buildings;
          489. $300,000 to Ford City, Pennsylvania for 
        renovation of industrial park buildings;
          490. $300,000 to Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania 
        for building renovation in the Monessen Riverfront 
        Industrial Park;
          491. $325,000 to the University Technology Park, Inc. 
        in Chester, Pennsylvania for facilities construction;
          492. $350,000 to the City of Erie, Pennsylvania for 
        facilities construction at the former EMI/Gunite 
        Corporation facility;
          493. $350,000 to the Oil Creek Railway Historical 
        Society located in Titusville, Pennsylvania for 
        facilities renovations, upgrades, landscaping and for 
        the purchase of railway cars;
          494. $350,000 for construction of a community center 
        in Dushore, Sullivan County, Pennsylvania;
          495. $450,000 to the City of Johnstown, Pennsylvania 
        for construction of a war memorial and conference 
        center;
          496. $75,000 to the Town of West Warwick, Rhode 
        Island for construction of a senior/community center;
          497. $100,000 to the Town of Burrillville, Rhode 
        Island for recreational facilities construction and 
        renovation at the Branch River and Hauser Memorial 
        Field Park areas, including pedestrian walkways;
          498. $250,000 to the City of Central Falls, Rhode 
        Island for recreational facilities construction and 
        renovation;
          499. $100,000 to the Eau Claire Development 
        Corporation in South Carolina for land acquisition near 
        Farrow Road;
          500. $150,000 to the Golden Harvest Food Bank in 
        Aiken, South Carolina for facilities expansion for the 
        Feed the People project;
          501. $150,000 to Lee County, South Carolina for 
        Ashwood Gymnasium renovations;
          502. $150,000 to Calhoun County, South Carolina for 
        construction of a community recreational facility;
          503. $225,000 to the South Carolina School for the 
        Deaf and Blind in Spartanburg, South Carolina for 
        construction of a teaching/living facility;
          504. $275,000 to Dakota Wesleyan University for 
        facilities construction for the McGovern Library and 
        Center for Public Service;
          505. $100,000 to Williamson County, Tennessee for 
        planning for the development of the Williamson County 
        Technology and Research Park;
          506. $100,000 to the 28th Legislative District 
        Community Development Corporation for planning 
        activities for the redevelopment of the Bushtown 
        community in Chattanooga, Tennessee;
          507. $100,000 to the Cocaine & Alcohol Awareness 
        Program, Inc. in Tennessee for renovation and 
        construction of facilities;
          508. $150,000 to Hamilton County, Tennessee for 
        facilities construction for a Center for 
        Entrepreneurial Growth Incubator;
          509. $175,000 to the City of Jackson, Tennessee for 
        industrial park land acquisition;
          510. $450,000 to Knox County, Tennessee for 
        facilities preservation, construction, renovation and 
        expansion at the Beck Cultural Exchange Center, the 
        Blount Mansion, the Ramsey House and at Willow Creek 
        Youth Park for the Knox Cultural and Tourism 
        initiative;
          511. $575,000 to the Bijou Theatre Center in 
        Knoxville, Tennessee for facilities renovations;
          512. $75,000 to the San Antonio Food Bank in San 
        Antonio, Texas for land acquisition and facility 
        buildout;
          513. $100,000 to Williamson County, Texas for 
        construction of a community center;
          514. $100,000 to the City of Temple, Texas for land 
        acquisition and building demolition along Martin Luther 
        King Boulevard;
          515. $100,000 to the McAllen Boys and Girls Club in 
        McAllen, Texas for construction;
          516. $100,000 to the City of Beaumont, Texas for 
        building renovations and construction of parking 
        facilities;
          517. $100,000 to the Marshall Downtown Development 
        Corporation Marshall, Texas for planning and renovation 
        to permit reuse of a downtown building;
          518. $100,000 to the Abilene Preservation League, in 
        Abilene, Texas for restoration of the Swenson House;
          519. $100,000 to the San Angelo Old Town Conservancy, 
        Inc. in San Angelo, Texas for restoration of the 
        Runkles and Rackley Building for reuse;
          520. $150,000 to the City of Houston, Texas for 
        construction of the Townwood Community Center;
          521. $150,000 to the City of Dallas, Texas for 
        Farmers Market renovation;
          522. $150,000 to the City of El Paso, Texas for 
        restoration of the Plaza Theatre;
          523. $150,000 to the City of San Angelo, Texas for 
        renovation of tourism facilities;
          524. $200,000 to the Permian Basin Petroleum Museum 
        in Midland, Texas for facilities renovations and 
        improvements;
          525. $200,000 to the City of Fort Worth, Texas for 
        renovation of the Clark's Department store building for 
        reuse;
          526. $225,000 to the Brazos Valley Family Medicine 
        Center in Bryan, Texas for facilities improvements and 
        buildout for the Center for Excellence in Family 
        Medicine and Rural Primary Care;
          527. $225,000 to the City of La Feria, Texas for 
        construction of a Boys and Girls Club;
          528. $300,000 to the City of Waco, Texas for 
        construction of a community center;
          529. $350,000 to the Old Red Courthouse, Inc. in 
        Dallas, Texas for facilities restoration and 
        improvements;
          530. $450,000 to Rice University for construction of 
        the Rice University-Texas Medical Center Joint Research 
        Facility in Houston, Texas;
          531. $450,000 to the City of Fort Worth, Texas for 
        construction of urban waterfront improvements for the 
        Trinity River Vision Project;
          532. $900,000 for Christus Santa Rosa Children's 
        Hospital in San Antonio, Texas for facilities upgrades;
          533. $100,000 to the City of Greenville, Texas for 
        renovations to downtown buildings;
          534. $200,000 to the City of Dallas, Texas for 
        restoration of the Texas Theatre;
          535. $75,000 to the Utah Shakespearean Festival for 
        architectural and engineering design of a performance 
        facility;
          536. $75,000 to Salt Lake City, Utah for streetscape 
        improvements in the Ninth and Ninth neighborhood;
          537. $150,000 to West Valley City, Utah for 
        facilities construction and renovation for the Cultural 
        Celebration Center;
          538. $225,000 to the City of Tremonton, Utah for 
        construction of a Historic Wagon Museum;
          539. $75,000 for the Rockfish Community Center in 
        Nelson County, Virginia for roof replacement;
          540. $75,000 for the Town of Boydton, Virginia for 
        facilities improvements in connection with its downtown 
        revitalization;
          541. $100,000 to the Lorton Arts Foundation, 
        Incorporated in Lorton, Virginia for facilities 
        renovation and construction;
          542. $100,000 for the Sedalia Center in Bedford 
        County, Virginia to assist with construction costs of 
        this regional cultural center;
          543. $100,000 for the Colonial Theater in the Town of 
        South Hill, Virginia for facilities renovation;
          544. $100,000 to the John Singelton Mosby Museum 
        Foundation in Warrenton, Virginia for facilities 
        renovations;
          545. $100,000 to the Arlington Housing Corporation in 
        Arlington County, Virginia for property acquisition, 
        building demolition and facilities rehabilitation;
          546. $100,000 to the Reston Association in Reston, 
        Virginia for construction of the Reston Southgate 
        Community Center;
          547. $100,000 to Fairfax County, Virginia for 
        construction of the Richmond Highway Town Center;
          548. $100,000 to Volunteers of America, Chesapeake, 
        Inc. for renovation of the Bailey's Crossroads 
        Community Shelter;
          549. $100,000 to Community Lodgings in Alexandria, 
        Virginia for renovations to a family learning center;
          550. $100,000 to the Boys and Girls Club of Greater 
        Hampton Roads, Virginia for facilities renovations and 
        upgrades;
          551. $100,000 to the Children's Museum of Virginia in 
        Portsmouth, Virginia for facilities renovation and 
        expansion;
          552. $125,000 to Craig County, Virginia for 
        construction of a library;
          553. $125,000 to the Dabney S. Lancaster Community 
        College in Virginia for construction of the Virginia 
        Packaging Applications Center;
          554. $150,000 to the City of Suffolk, Virginia for 
        construction of the Great Dismal Swamp Visitors Center;
          555. $150,000 for the North Theater in the City of 
        Danville, Virginia for facilities renovation;
          556. $200,000 to the Imani Intergenerational 
        Community Development Center, Inc. for facilities 
        construction and renovation of the 1400 block of Hull 
        Street in Richmond, Virginia;
          557. $200,000 to the City of Fairfax, Virginia for 
        the Old Town Fairfax Redevelopment Project for 
        construction of parking facilities;
          558. $200,000 to Prince William County, Virginia for 
        the Nokesville Redevelopment Project for facilities 
        rehabilitation and renovation and streetscape 
        improvements;
          559. $200,000 for the Blue Ridge Institute at Ferrum 
        College in the Town of Ferrum, Virginia for the 
        construction of the Agricultural Heritage Education 
        Center to assist with economic development and tourism 
        in the area;
          560. $200,000 for Charlotte County, Virginia for 
        infrastructure and building upgrades;
          561. $200,000 for the Martinsville-Henry County 
        Historical Society in Virginia for improvements to the 
        Old Henry County Court House and Museum;
          562. $200,000 for the Lewis and Clark Exploratory 
        Center in Charlottesville, Virginia for facilities 
        construction;
          563. $225,000 to the City of Newport News, Virginia 
        for the Warwick Boulevard Commercial Corridor 
        Improvement Project for sidewalks, street furniture and 
        facade improvements;
          564. $250,000 for The Prizery in the Town of South 
        Boston, Virginia to assist with renovation efforts and 
        the creation of a community arts center;
          565. $250,000 to Edgehill Recovery Retreat Center in 
        Winchester, Virginia for facilities construction;
          566. $275,000 to the Virginia Holocaust Museum in 
        Richmond, Virginia for facilities renovations and 
        buildout;
          567. $325,000 to the Windy Hill Foundation in 
        Middleburg, Virginia for the construction of affordable 
        housing;
          568. $350,000 to Fairfax County, Virginia for 
        facilities construction for Magnet Housing;
          569. $400,000 for the Institute of Advanced Learning 
        and Research in Danville, Virginia for installation of 
        high technology systems to create and support platform 
        for high-tech instruction;
          570. $400,000 to the Christopher Newport University 
        Foundation of Newport News, Virginia for facilities 
        construction and renovation;
          571. $900,000 to the Art Museum of Western Virginia 
        for construction of a new Art Museum/IMAX Theatre in 
        Roanoke, Virginia;
          572. $90,000 to the Southern Vermont Recreation 
        Center Foundation, in Springfield, Vermont for the 
        construction of a community center;
          573. $100,000 to the Department of Vermont, Veterans 
        of Foreign Wars for construction of veterans memorials 
        in Springfield and Putney, Vermont;
          574. $75,000 to the Boys and Girls Club in Vancouver, 
        Washington for construction of a facility;
          575. $80,000 to the City of Mount Vernon, Washington 
        for construction of a performing arts facility;
          576. $100,000 to the Tacoma Art Museum in Tacoma, 
        Washington for building construction;
          577. $100,000 to Jefferson County, Washington for 
        restoration of the Jefferson County Courthouse Clock 
        Tower;
          578. $100,000 to Olympic College in Washington for 
        construction at the Shelton Branch;
          579. $100,000 to the Lutheran Compass Center in 
        Seattle, Washington for rehabilitation and expansion of 
        facilities;
          580. $100,000 to the City of Burien, Washington for 
        land acquisition;
          581. $125,000 to the Westport Senior Center in 
        Westport, Washington for construction;
          582. $125,000 to Peninsula College in Washington for 
        construction of a science facility;
          583. $125,000 to the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe of 
        Washington for construction of a community center;
          584. $150,000 to the City of Bremerton, Washington 
        for streetscape and facade renovation;
          585. $225,000 to the Children's Home Society of 
        Washington for facilities construction for the Spokane 
        Valley Family Resource Center;
          586. $350,000 to Kent Youth and Family Services in 
        Kent, Washington for facilities expansion and 
        rehabilitation for the Springwood Community Center;
          587. $450,000 to the City of Yakima, Washington for 
        renovation of the Capitol Theatre;
          588. $450,000 to Richard Allen Enterprises in 
        Spokane, Washington for the Emmanuel Center Project for 
        facilities expansion;
          589. $100,000 to Centro Hispano in Madison, Wisconsin 
        for expansion of facilities;
          590. $100,000 to the East Madison Community Center in 
        Wisconsin for expansion of facilities;
          591. $175,000 to West End Development Corporation in 
        Milwaukee, Wisconsin for building acquisition and 
        renovation in the Near West Side neighborhood;
          592. $175,000 to the Redevelopment Authority of the 
        City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin for building and facade 
        renovation along the Vliet Street corridor;
          593. $225,000 to St. Norbert College in DePere, 
        Wisconsin for continued construction of a Regional 
        Library Learning Center;
          594. $350,000 to the Military Veterans Museum, Inc. 
        in Oshkosh, Wisconsin for facilities construction;
          595. $900,000 to the City of Superior, Wisconsin for 
        facilities improvements, new construction and 
        relocation of facilities at the Barker's Island 
        Redevelopment Project;
          596. $1,000,000 to the City of Wausau, Wisconsin for 
        the construction of a business development center;
          597. $150,000 to the Business and Industrial 
        Development Corporation for the acquisition, renovation 
        and reuse of the Clendenin Middle School;
          598. $225,000 to the Jefferson County Development 
        Authority, West Virginia for infrastructure 
        improvements for the Burr Industrial Park near Charles 
        Town, West Virginia;
          599. $300,000 to the Strand Theatre Preservation 
        Society in Moundsville, West Virginia for theatre 
        renovations;
          600. $500,000 to the Monongalia County Schools 
        Foundation, Inc. in West Virginia for construction of 
        recreation facilities;
          601. $750,000 to the Greenbrier Valley Economic 
        Development Corporation in Lewisburg, West Virginia for 
        facilities construction and buildout;
          602. $750,000 to the Vandalia Heritage Foundation, 
        Inc. for land acquisition;
          603. $1,050,000 to the 4-County Economic Development 
        Corporation in Oak Hill, West Virginia for facilities 
        construction and buildout;
          604. $1,330,000 to Glenville State College in 
        Glenville, West Virginia for the construction of a new 
        campus community education center;
          605. $3,200,000 to the West Virginia High Technology 
        Consortium Foundation, Inc. for land acquisition to 
        expand a high technology business park;
          606. $450,000 to the University of Wyoming for 
        construction of the Wyoming Technology Business Center 
        in Laramie, Wyoming.
          --$21,000,000 for the Neighborhood Initiatives 
        program. Targeted grants shall be provided as follows:
          1. $75,000 for the Heart of Illinois Big Brothers Big 
        Sisters program in Peoria, Illinois for the 
        construction of a facility;
          2. $100,000 to the City of Peoria, Illinois, for the 
        Southern Gateway revitalization project to redevelop 
        this neighborhood into a commercial center;
          3. $150,000 for the Center for the Prevention of 
        Abuse in Peoria, Illinois for the construction of a 
        facility;
          4. $500,000 for the City of Peoria, Illinois for 
        construction on a proposed medical/technical district 
        in Peoria, Illinois;
          5. $650,000 for OSF Saint Francis Medical Center in 
        Peoria, Illinois for the renovation of treatment rooms 
        to expand the facility's emergency department;
          6. $725,000 for Eureka College in Eureka, Illinois 
        for construction of a new Science and Technology 
        Center;
          7. $250,000 to the Community Economic Empowerment 
        Corporation for construction of a recreation center in 
        Louisville, Kentucky;
          8. $350,000 for the Rhema Development Corporation for 
        renovation of housing facilities in Louisville, 
        Kentucky;
          9. $400,000 for the Shiloh Community Renewal Center 
        in Louisville, Kentucky for renovation and conversion 
        of a building into an apartment facility for the 
        elderly;
          10. $400,000 for the St. Stephen Family Life Center 
        in Louisville, Kentucky for facilities renovation of 
        Stewart Hall;
          11. $400,000 for the Shelby Park Neighborhood 
        Association for the design and construction of a 
        community center in Louisville, Kentucky;
          12. $400,000 for the New Zion Community Foundation 
        for facilities renovations and improvements;
          13. $500,000 to NYSERNET to develop a blueprint for 
        building or acquiring dark fiber deployment throughout 
        Upstate New York;
          14. $500,000 to the Cortland County Industrial 
        Development Authority in New York for facilities 
        improvements, equipment, and relocation activities for 
        the Buckbee Mears manufacturing facility;
          15. $5,000,000 to the City of Syracuse, New York for 
        the Neighborhood Initiative Program;
          16. $1,000,000 to The Ohio State University in 
        Columbus, Ohio for The Ohio State University 
        Neighborhoods Revitalization Initiative;
          17. $50,000 for the Halifax County Community Action 
        Agency for the development of a Housing Initiative in 
        Charlotte County, Virginia; --
          18. $150,000 to Oneida County, Wisconsin for the 
        restoration of an historic building;
          19. $150,000 to Langlade County, Wisconsin for the 
        restoration of an historic building;
          20. $3,500,000 for the Institute for Scientific 
        Research for construction related to high-technology 
        diversification initiative;
          21. $5,750,000 for the Vandalia Heritage Foundation, 
        Inc. for community and neighborhood revitalization and 
        economic diversification initiatives.
    Additionally, not less than $4,900,000 is provided for 
transfer to the Working Capital Fund to support the development 
of and modifications to information technology systems that 
serve programs or activities under Community Planning and 
Development.
    Language is included in the bill, similar to language 
carried in prior Acts, which: (1) designates amounts available 
for the various programs and activities funded under this 
account; (2) limits administrative expenses to no more than 20 
percent of any grant with certain exceptions; and (3) provides 
three-year availability for obligation of funds provided under 
this heading.
    Language is also included which makes technical changes to 
grants provided in Public Laws 107-73 and 108-10.

                      COLONIAS GATEWAY INITIATIVE




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................                $0
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................                 0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        16,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003......................                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............       -16,000,000


    The recommendation does not include $16,000,000 requested 
for a new initiative in the Colonias since the necessary 
authorization legislation has not been enacted.

                     URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACTION GRANT

                              (RESCISSION)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      -$30,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 enacted..............................                 0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       -30,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003......................       -30,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............                 0


    The Committee recommends a rescission of $30,000,000 from 
unexpended balances from this program, the same amount as 
requested.

         COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOAN GUARANTEES PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Limitation on
                                         Program costs      guaranteed
                                                              loans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......               $0               $0
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        7,277,000      275,000,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                0                0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003             -7,277,000     -275,000,000
 appropriation........................
Comparison with fiscal year 2004                      0                0
 budget request.......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Section 108 Loan Guarantees program underwrites private 
market loans to assist local communities in the financing of 
the acquisition and rehabilitation of publicly-owned real 
property, rehabilitation of housing, and certain economic 
development projects.
    The Committee does not recommend an appropriation for the 
section 108 loan program for fiscal year 2004, as requested. 
Based on current estimated usage of funds appropriated in 
fiscal year 2003, the Committee recommendation assumes that 
$6,000,000 in unobligated balances from prior year credit 
subsidy appropriations and $189,344,000 in unused loan 
commitment authority will be available in fiscal year 2004 for 
new section 108 loan commitments.

                       BROWNFIELDS REDEVELOPMENT




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $25,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        24,837,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +163,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       +25,000,000


    The Brownfields Redevelopment program provides competitive 
economic development grants in conjunction with section 108 
loan guarantees for qualified brownfield projects. Grants are 
made in accordance with section 108(q) selection criteria.
    The goal of the program is to return contaminated sites to 
productive uses with an emphasis on creating substantial 
numbers of jobs for lower-income people in physically and 
economically distressed neighborhoods.
    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for this program, an 
increase of $163,000 above the level provided in fiscal year 
2003. The budget request proposed elimination of this program 
based on the assumption that this program is duplicative of 
brownfields activities funded through the Environmental 
Protection Agency. The Committee believes that EPA and HUD 
programs should complement rather than duplicate efforts to 
recover brownfields sites to promote community economic 
development. To avoid duplication, the Committee expects HUD to 
closely coordinate its efforts with EPA.
    Language is included in the bill to provide two-year 
availability for funds provided under this account.

                  HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $2,064,100,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     1,987,000,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     2,197,400,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +77,100,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......      -133,300,000


    The HOME investment partnerships program provides grants to 
States, units of local government, Indian tribes and insular 
areas, through formula allocation, for the purpose of expanding 
the supply of affordable housing in the jurisdiction. Upon 
receipt, State and local governments develop a comprehensive 
housing affordability strategy that enables them to acquire, 
rehabilitate, or construct new affordable housing, or to 
provide rental assistance to eligible families.
    The Committee recommends $2,064,100,000 for activities 
funded under this account, an increase of $77,100,000 above the 
fiscal year 2003 level and $133,300,000 below the request. 
Funds are provided as follows:
          --Formula Grants: $1,879,100,000 for formula grants 
        for participating jurisdictions (States, units of local 
        government and consortia of units local government) and 
        insular areas, a $25,178,000 increase above the fiscal 
        year 2003. Based on historical usage, the Committee 
        estimates that 36 percent of funds will be used for new 
        construction, 47 percent for rehabilitation, 14 percent 
        for acquisition, and 3 percent for tenant-based rental 
        assistance. Of the amount provided, pursuant to the 
        statute, at least 15 percent of each participating 
        jurisdiction's allocation is reserved for housing that 
        is developed, sponsored, or owned by Community Housing 
        Development Organizations (CHDOs);
          --Down-payment Assistance Initiative: $125,000,000 
        for the Down-payment Assistance Initiative to be 
        allocated by the Secretary to participating 
        jurisdictions to provide down-payment assistance to 
        low-income families to help them achieve homeownership;
          --Housing Counseling: $40,000,000 for housing 
        counseling programs. The Committee has continued 
        funding for this activity within this account rather 
        than creating a separate account as proposed in the 
        budget request;
          --HOME/CHDO Technical Assistance: $18,000,000 for 
        technical assistance activities for State and local 
        participating jurisdictions and non-profit CHDOs, an 
        increase of $117,000 above the amount provided in 
        fiscal year 2003, and $2,000,000 above the request. The 
        Committee notes that the HOME statute authorizes 
        technical assistance to be provided through contracts 
        with eligible non-profit intermediaries as well as with 
        other organizations recommended by participating 
        jurisdictions and therefore expects HUD to use 
        $8,000,000 to contract with qualified non-profit 
        intermediaries to provide CHDO technical assistance in 
        fiscal year 2004;
          --Working Capital Fund: no less than $2,100,000 for 
        transfer to the Working Capital Fund to support the 
        development and modification of information technology 
        systems which serve programs and activities under 
        Community Planning and Development.
    The recommendation does not include $25,000,000 for a new 
program for lead paint abatement activities under this account 
requested in the budget. The Committee notes that such program 
is unauthorized and may be duplicative of assistance provided 
under the regular lead paint hazard reduction grant program and 
other departmental programs.
    Language is included in the bill to provide two-year 
availability for funds provided under this account.

                       HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANTS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $1,242,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     1,217,037,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     1,325,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +24,963,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       -83,000,000


    The homeless assistance grants account provides funding for 
the following homeless programs under title IV of the McKinney 
Act: (1) the emergency shelter grants program; (2) the 
supportive housing program; (3) the section 8 moderate 
rehabilitation (single room occupancy) program; and (4) the 
shelter plus care program. This account also supports 
activities eligible under the innovative homeless initiatives 
demonstration program.
    The Committee recommends funding homeless programs at 
$1,242,000,000, an increase of $24,963,000 above the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2003. The recommendation includes full 
funding for the costs associated with the renewal of all 
expiring Shelter Plus Care contracts. Language is included in 
the bill requiring funds to be made available for this purpose.
    The recommendation also includes $12,000,000 for the 
national homeless data analysis project and for technical 
assistance, and no less than $2,580,000 for transfer to the 
Working Capital Fund for development and modifications of 
information technology systems that serve activities under 
Community Planning and Development.
    The recommendation does not include $1,500,000 requested 
under this account for administrative costs for the Interagency 
Council on the Homeless but instead has continued funding for 
these activities as a separate account under title III.
    Language is included in the bill which: (1) requires not 
less than 30 percent of the funds appropriated, excluding 
amounts made available for renewals under the shelter plus care 
program, be used for permanent housing; (2) requires the 
renewal of all expiring shelter plus care contracts; (3) 
requires funding recipients to provide a 25 percent match for 
social services activities; (4) requires all homeless programs 
to coordinate their programs with mainstream health, social 
services and employment programs; and (5) provides two-year 
availability for obligation of funds provided under this 
account, except that no year availability is provided for the 
portion of funding necessary to meet initial contract 
requirements for the Single Room Occupancy program.

                      SAMARITAN HOUSING INITIATIVE




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................                $0
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................                 0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        50,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       -50,000,000


    The recommendation does not include $50,000,000 requested 
in the budget for a new homeless assistance grant program since 
the necessary authorization legislation has not yet been 
transmitted to the Congress for its consideration.

                            Housing Programs


                    HOUSING FOR SPECIAL POPULATIONS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation......................             \1\ $0
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......................  \1\ 1,027,081,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request......................              \1\ 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation.......  \1\ -1,027,081,00
                                                                       0
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request......              \1\ 0

\1\ In fiscal year 2003 funding for the housing for the elderly (Section
  202) program and for housing the disabled (Section 811) program were
  provided for under this account.

    The Committee recommendation adopts the budget proposal to 
fund the section 202 program through a new Housing for the 
Elderly account and the section 811 program through a new 
Housing for the Disabled account in lieu of continuing funding 
for both programs in the Housing for Special Populations 
account.

                        HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................  \1\ $773,320,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................             \1\ 0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................   \1\ 773,636,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........  \1\ +773,320,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......         -316,000

\1\ In fiscal year 2003, the housing for the elderly (Section 202)
  program and related activities were funded under the Housing for
  Special Populations account.

    The housing for the elderly (Section 202) program provides 
eligible private, non-profit organizations with capital grants 
to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation or construction of 
housing intended for low-income elderly people. In addition, 
the program provides project-based rental assistance (PRAC) to 
support operational costs for units constructed under the 
program.
    The Committee recommends a total program level of 
$789,320,000 for the Section 202 program for fiscal year 2004, 
of which $773,320,000 is provided as a direct appropriation and 
$16,000,000 is derived from unobligated balances from funds 
provided for PRAC renewals in fiscal year 2003 that are not 
needed to meet this requirement and recaptures of excess prior 
year funds. The recommendation allocates funding as follows:
          --$695,850,000 for new capital and project rental 
        assistance contracts (PRAC), an increase of $23,902,000 
        above fiscal year 2003 and $22,384,000 above the 
        request;
          --$2,000,000 for one-year renewals of expiring PRAC 
        payments, instead of $26,000,000 requested in the 
        budget. This amount represents the revised estimate of 
        funding necessary for PRAC renewals in fiscal year 
        2004;
          --$50,000,000 for service coordinators and the 
        continuation of congregate services grants;
          --$25,000,000 for grants to convert section 202 
        projects to assisted living facilities;
          --$16,000,000 for grants for planning, preliminary 
        design and site control activities; and
          --no less than $470,000 for transfer to the Working 
        Capital Fund to support the development of and 
        modifications to information technology systems which 
        support programs and activities for elderly programs.
    The Committee recommendation does not include new language, 
requested in the budget, to make section 202 funds available 
for expenditure for 12 years. While the Committee is aware that 
grants awarded under the section 202 program include 5 years of 
operating expenses, the Committee believes that 7 years to 
complete construction is unduly long. The Committee is 
concerned that planning, design and site control challenges may 
contribute to delays in completion of, and increased cost for, 
some projects. The Committee has again included funds to 
provide grants for planning, preliminary design, and site 
control. The Committee looks forward to receiving the report 
required pursuant to the fiscal year 2003 appropriations Act on 
actions which can be taken to accelerate the completion of 
projects under the section 202 program and alternatives for 
restructuring or otherwise modifying the program, including the 
option to restructure this program in a manner similar to other 
Federally-funded construction programs.
    Language is included, carried in prior years, relating to 
the initial contract and renewal terms for assistance provided 
under this heading.
    Language is included as requested making funds available 
for obligation for three years.
    New language is included as requested transferring all 
outstanding balances for section 202 related programs from the 
Housing for Special Populations account to this account.
    The recommendation does not include language requested in 
the budget authorizing the Secretary to waive any statutory and 
regulatory requirements related to the section 202 program. The 
Committee believes that any statutory or regulatory problems 
associated with these programs should be addressed through the 
appropriate legislative or regulatory processes.

                        HOUSING FOR THE DISABLED

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................  \1\ $250,570,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................             \1\ 0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................   \1\ 250,515,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........  \1\ +250,570,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......          +55,000

\1\ In fiscal year 2003, the supportive housing for the disabled
  (Section 811) program and related activities were funded under the
  Housing for Special Populations account.

    The housing for the disabled (Section 811) program provides 
eligible private, non-profit organizations with capital grants 
to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation or construction of 
supportive housing for the disabled and provides project-based 
rental assistance (PRAC) to support operational costs for such 
units. In addition, to increase flexibility, twenty-five 
percent of the funding for supportive housing for the disabled 
is available for tenant-based assistance.
    The Committee recommends a total program level of 
$256,470,000 for Section 811 activities for fiscal year 2004, 
of which $250,570,000 is provided as a direct appropriation and 
$5,900,000 is derived from unobligated balances from funds 
provided for PRAC renewals in fiscal year 2003 that are not 
needed to meet this requirement and recaptures of excess prior 
year funds. The recommendation allocates funding as follows:
          --$213,300,000 for new capital and PRAC contracts and 
        new vouchers, a $13,255,000 increase above the request 
        and $2,816,000 above the fiscal year 2003 level;
          --$42,700,000 for renewal costs of section 811 
        tenant-based rental assistance and expiring PRAC 
        contracts for up to a one-year term, instead of 
        $50,000,000 requested in the budget. This amount 
        represents the revised estimate of funding necessary 
        for PRAC renewals in fiscal year 2004; and
          --no less than $470,000 for transfer to the Working 
        Capital Fund for the development and maintenance of 
        information technology systems for programs and 
        activities for disabled housing programs.
    Language is included, carried in prior years, allowing up 
to 25 percent of the funds provided, excluding amounts for 
renewals of rental assistance and PRAC contracts, to be used 
for new rental assistance as requested.
    Language is included, carried in prior years, relating to 
the initial contract and renewal terms for assistance provided 
under this heading.
    Language is included as requested making funds available 
for obligation for three years.
    New language is included as requested transferring all 
outstanding balances for section 811 programs from the Housing 
for Special Populations account to this account.
    New language requested in the budget is not included making 
section 811 funds available for expenditure for 12 years. In 
addition, the recommendation does not include language 
requested in the budget authorizing the Secretary to waive any 
statutory and regulatory requirements related to the section 
811 program. The Committee believes that any statutory or 
regulatory problems associated with these programs should be 
addressed through the appropriate legislative or regulatory 
processes.

                           HOUSING COUNSELING




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................             \1\ 0
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................             \1\ 0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       $45,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........             \1\ 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......   \1\ -45,000,000

\1\ In fiscal year 2003, $40,000,000 was appropriated for housing
  counseling as a set-aside under the HOME Investments Partnership
  Program account.

    Section 106 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 
1968 authorized HUD to provide housing counseling services to 
homebuyers, homeowners, low and moderate income renters, and 
the homeless.
    The Committee does not recommend the creation of a separate 
account for housing counseling activities, but instead has 
provided $40,000,000 for this activity as a set-aside within 
the HOME Investments Partnership Program account.

                       RENTAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE

                              (RESCISSION)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................     -$303,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................      -100,000,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................      -303,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........      -203,000,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 authorized 
the section 236 Rental Housing Assistance Program to subsidize 
the monthly mortgage payment of an owner of a rental or 
cooperative project in order to reduce the rents for lower 
income tenants.
    The Committee recommends a rescission of $303,000,000 from 
amounts appropriated in prior years which are in excess of 
amounts required to subsidize mortgages under section 236, as 
requested.

                         FLEXIBLE SUBSIDY FUND

                          (TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

    The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968 authorized 
HUD to establish a revolving fund into which rental collections 
in excess of the established basic rents for units in section 
236 subsidized projects are deposited. Subject to approval in 
appropriations acts, the Secretary is authorized under the 
Housing and Community Development Amendment of 1978 to transfer 
excess rent collections received after 1978 to the Troubled 
Projects Operating Subsidy program, renamed the Flexible 
Subsidy Fund.
    The Committee recommends that the account continue to serve 
as a repository of excess rental charges appropriated from the 
Rental Housing Assistance Fund. Although these resources will 
not be used for new reservations, they will continue to offset 
Flexible Subsidy outlays and other discretionary expenditures 
to support affordable housing projects.
    The recommendation includes language identical to language 
carried in prior years, modified from the request, to allow 
surplus funds derived from rental collections which were in 
excess of allowable rents levels to be returned to project 
owners only for the purposes of rehabilitating and renovating 
those properties.

                  MANUFACTURED HOUSING FEES TRUST FUND




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $13,000,000
Offsetting collections................................       -13,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        12,915,000
Offsetting collections................................       -13,000,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        17,000,000
Offsetting collections................................       -17,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........           +85,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......        -4,000,000


    The National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety 
Standards Act of 1974, as amended by the Manufactured Housing 
Improvement Act of 2000, authorized the Secretary to establish 
Federal manufactured home construction and safety standards for 
the construction, design, and performance of manufactured 
homes. All manufactured homes are required to meet the Federal 
standards, and fees are charged to producers to cover the costs 
of administering the Act.
    The Committee recommends up to $13,000,000 for the 
manufactured housing standards programs to be derived from fees 
collected and deposited in the Manufactured Housing Fees Trust 
Fund established pursuant to the Manufactured Housing 
Improvement Act of 2000. The amount recommended is an increase 
of $85,000 above the fiscal year 2003 level and a decrease of 
$4,000,000 below the fiscal year 2003 request.

                     Federal Housing Administration


               MUTUAL MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Limitation of        Limitation of        Administrative
                                                       direct loans       guaranteed loans         expenses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 recommendation..................          $50,000,000     $185,000,000,000         $359,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation...................          100,000,000      165,000,000,000          345,568,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request..................           50,000,000      185,000,000,000          359,000,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2003 appropriation...          -50,000,000      +20,000,000,000          +13,432,000
Comparison with Fiscal year 2004 budget request..                    0                    0                    0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FHA mutual mortgage insurance program account includes 
the mutual mortgage insurance (MMI) and cooperative management 
housing insurance (CMHI) funds. This program account covers 
unsubsidized programs, primarily the single-family home 
mortgage program, which is the largest of all the FHA programs. 
The cooperative housing insurance program provides mortgages 
for cooperative housing projects of more than five units that 
are occupied by members of a cooperative housing corporation.
    The Committee recommends the following limitations on loan 
commitments in the MMI program account as follows: 
$185,000,000,000 for loan guarantees and $50,000,000 for direct 
loans. The recommendation also includes $359,000,000 for 
administrative expenses, of which $355,000,000 is transferred 
to the Salaries and expenses account, and $4,000,000 is 
transferred to the Office of Inspector General. In addition, 
$85,000,000 is provided for non-overhead administrative 
contract expenses, of which no less than $20,744,000 is 
transferred to the Working Capital Fund for development and 
modifications to information technology systems that serve 
programs or activities under Housing Programs or the Federal 
Housing Administration.
    Language is continued as requested, modified from language 
carried in previous years, appropriating additional 
administrative expenses in certain circumstances.
    The Committee recommendation does not include authorization 
legislation proposed in the budget to create a new loan program 
for borrowers with poor credit histories who are currently 
being served in the conventional market. The Committee 
questions the fairness of this proposal to other participants 
in the FHA single-family program since the proposal would 
reduce the premiums charged to higher-risk borrowers below the 
amount paid by all other participants in the program. In 
addition, the Committee questions whether such a program would 
make such borrowers more vulnerable to predatory lending 
practices. The Committee notes that the budget estimates the 
default rate on this proposed program to be over 15 percent, 
thus raising concerns about the potential cost of this program 
to the Federal government.
    According to the Mortgage Bankers Association of America, 
the nation experienced a 30-year high in mortgage foreclosures 
in 2002. The Committee is interested in actions that are being 
taken and can be taken by the Department to avoid further 
increases in the mortgage foreclosure rate for homeowners 
participating in the FHA insurance program. The Department is 
directed to provide a report to the Committee no later than 
January 5, 2004 on the current and planned foreclosure 
mitigation programs being used by the Department to reduce the 
number of foreclosures on FHA insured homes; the annual costs 
associated with foreclosures on FHA insured homes; the annual 
costs associated with foreclosure mitigation programs; and the 
efficiency of mortgage foreclosure mitigation programs to 
reduce the number of foreclosures.

                GENERAL AND SPECIAL RISK PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Limitation of    Limitation of    Administrative
                                                direct loans    guaranteed loans     expenses      Program costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 recommendation..............     $50,000,000    $25,000,000,000    $229,000,000     $15,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation...............      50,000,000     23,000,000,000     222,262,000      15,000,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request..............      50,000,000     25,000,000,000     229,000,000      14,902,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003                            0     +2,000,000,000      +6,738,000         +98,000
 appropriation...............................
Comparison with Fiscal year 2004 budget                     0                  0               0               0
 request.....................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FHA general and special risk insurance (GI and SRI) 
program account includes 17 different programs administered by 
the FHA. The GI fund includes a wide variety of insurance 
programs for special purpose single and multi-family loans, 
including loans for property improvements, manufactured 
housing, multi-family rental housing, condominiums, housing for 
the elderly, hospitals, group practice facilities and nursing 
homes. The SRI fund includes insurance programs for mortgages 
in older, declining urban areas which would not be otherwise 
eligible for insurance, mortgages with interest reduction 
payments, mortgages for experimental housing and for high-risk 
mortgagors who would not normally be eligible for mortgage 
insurance without housing counseling.
    The Committee recommends the following limitations on loan 
commitments for the general and special risk insurance program 
account as requested: $25,000,000,000 for loan guarantees and 
$50,000,000 for direct loans.
    As requested, the recommendation includes a $15,000,000 
direct appropriation for credit subsidy. The recommendation 
also includes $229,000,000 for administrative expenses, of 
which $209,000,000 is transferred to the Salaries and Expenses 
account and $20,000,000 is transferred to the Office of 
Inspector General. An additional $93,780,000 is provided for 
non-overhead administrative expenses, of which no less than 
$16,946,000 is transferred to the Working Capital Fund for 
development and modifications to information technology systems 
that serve activities under Housing Programs or Federal Housing 
Administration.
    Language is continued, carried in previous years, 
appropriating additional administrative expenses in certain 
circumstances.

                GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION

GUARANTEES OF MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM ACCOUNT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Limitation of      Administrative
                                      guaranteed loans       expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 recommendation...     $200,000,000,000      $10,695,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation....      200,000,000,000       10,276,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request...      200,000,000,000       10,695,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003                      0             +419
 appropriation....................
Comparison with Fiscal year 2004                      0                0
 budget request...................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The guarantee of mortgage-backed securities program 
facilitates the financing of residential mortgage loans insured 
or guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), the 
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Rural Housing 
Services program. The Government National Mortgage Association 
(GNMA) guarantees the timely payment of principal and interest 
on securities issued by private service institutions such as 
mortgage companies, commercial banks, savings banks, and 
savings and loan associations which assemble pools of 
mortgages, and issues securities backed by the pools. In turn, 
investment proceeds are used to finance additional mortgage 
loans. Investors include non- traditional sources of credit in 
the housing market such as pension and retirement funds, life 
insurance companies and individuals.
    The recommendation includes a $200,000,000,000 limitation 
on loan commitments for mortgage-backed securities as 
requested, the same level provided in fiscal year 2003. The 
Committee also recommends $10,695,000 for administrative 
expenses to be transferred to the Salaries and Expenses 
account, as requested, $419,000 above the amount provided in 
fiscal year 2003.

                    Policy Development and Research


                        RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $47,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        46,695,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        51,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +305,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......        -4,000,000


    The Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 directs the 
Secretary to undertake programs of research, studies, testing, 
and demonstrations related to the HUD mission. These functions 
are carried out internally through contracts with industry, 
non-profit research organizations, and educational institutions 
and through agreements with state and local governments and 
other federal agencies.
    The bill includes $47,000,000 for research and technology, 
as requested. Of this amount, $7,500,000 is provided for the 
Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing (PATH) 
Initiative. The Committee believes that the PATH program should 
include all segments of the housing industry, including the 
manufactured housing sector. The Committee is concerned that 
PATH has not adequately addressed the research needs of this 
sector of the industry. The Committee expects the Department to 
increase support for manufactured housing from within the 
amounts provided for the PATH program.
    While the Committee has not included bill language 
designating specific amounts for program evaluations or a study 
of barriers to affordable housing, the Committee encourages the 
Department to conduct such studies from within the amounts 
provided under this account.
    Language is included making funds available for obligation 
for two years.

                   Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity





Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $46,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        45,601,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        50,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +399,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......        -4,000,000


    The Fair Housing Act, title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 
1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 
prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental and financing of 
housing and authorizes assistance to State and local agencies 
in administering the provision of fair housing statutes. The 
Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) assists State and local 
fair housing enforcement agencies that are certified by HUD as 
``substantially equivalent'' to HUD with respect to enforcement 
policies and procedures. The FHAP assures prompt and effective 
processing of complaints filed under title VIII that are within 
the jurisdiction of State and local fair housing agencies. The 
Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP) alleviates housing 
discrimination by providing support to private nonprofit 
organizations, State and local government agencies and other 
nonfederal entities for the purpose of eliminating or 
preventing discrimination in housing, and to enhance fair 
housing opportunities.
    The Committee recommends a total of $46,000,000 for this 
account, as requested.
    Of this amount, $25,750,000 is for FHAP and $20,250,000 is 
for FHIP.
    The Committee expects HUD to continue to provide quarterly 
reports on obligation and expenditure of these funds, 
delineated by each program and activity, with the first such 
report due no later than February 15, 2004.
    Language is included, carried in previous years, 
designating the amount available for FHIP.

                     Office of Lead Hazard Control


                         LEAD HAZARD REDUCTION




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $130,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       174,856,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       136,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       -44,856,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......        -6,000,000


    The Lead Hazard Reduction Program, authorized under the 
Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-550), 
provides grants to State and local governments to perform lead 
hazard reduction activities in housing occupied by low-income 
families. The program also provides technical assistance, 
undertakes research and evaluations of testing and cleanup 
methodologies, and develops technical guidance and regulations 
in cooperation with EPA.
    The Committee recommends $130,000,000 for this account, 
instead of $136,000,000 requested in the budget. Amounts 
provided are to be allocated as follows:
          --$100,000,000 is for grants to State and local 
        governments, and Native American tribes, for lead-based 
        paint abatement activities in private low-income 
        housing, $10,000,000 above the fiscal year 2003 level. 
        The Committee notes that funding for this program has 
        increased by 77 percent over the last three years.
          --$10,000,000 is for Operation LEAP (Lead Elimination 
        Action Program), a new initiative requested in the 
        budget to leverage private sector resources to 
        eliminate lead-based paint hazards in low-income 
        housing. Operation LEAP funds will be allocated 
        competitively to non-profit organizations and the 
        private sector for activities which leverage additional 
        funds for local lead hazard control programs. The 
        Department is directed to provide a report to the 
        Committee no later than September 15, 2003 on the 
        amount of private-sector funds leveraged, delineated by 
        funding and in-kind support, through this program to 
        eliminate lead-based paint hazards. Such report should 
        include the amount of private sector funding leveraged 
        for abatement of lead paint hazards and the number of 
        housing units addressed to date through this program.
          --$10,000,000 is for technical assistance and support 
        to State and local agencies and private property 
        owners, a $242,000 increase over fiscal year 2003 as 
        requested.
          --$10,000,000 is for the Healthy Homes program as 
        requested. These funds are competitively awarded to 
        State, local or county agencies, non-profit and 
        community-based organizations, landlord organizations, 
        parents' organizations, and environmental contractors, 
        for research, standards development, and education and 
        outreach activities related to housing-related 
        environmental childhood diseases.
    The recommendation does not include a separate set-aside 
for CLEAR Corps. The Committee notes that as part of the 
Consolidated Planning process, State and local governments are 
expected to partner with non-profit organizations to develop 
and implement their lead-based paint abatement plans. The 
Committee encourages local CLEAR Corps programs to partner with 
local governments to receive funding support as part of the 
locality's Consolidated Plan.
    The Committee is aware of a proposal put forth by the 
Alliance to End Childhood Lead Poisoning to create a Community 
Environmental Health Resource Center (CEHRC) to provide 
technical support, training, and education and outreach to 
community-based organizations to evaluate and control housing-
related and community-wide health hazards. While the Committee 
has not included an earmark for this new organization, the 
Committee encourages HUD to evaluate a proposal from the 
Alliance and provide a grant if warranted.
    The Committee reminds the Department that all funding 
provided under this heading is to be competitively awarded as 
required under the HUD Reform Act of 1989 and section 206 under 
Administrative Provisions under this title.

                                                                                  Management and Administration
                                                                                      salaries and expenses
                                                                                  (including transfer of funds)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                            By transfer
                                                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                                     Hawaiian
                                                                   Appropriation     FHA funds      GNMA funds          CPD          Title VI     Indian housing      housing          Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2004 recommendation..........................................    $547,000,000    $564,000,000     $10,695,000              $0        $150,000        $250,000         $35,000      $1,122,130
FY 2003 appropriation...........................................     526,852,000     544,639,000      10,276,000         993,000         149,000         199,000          35,000   1,083,143,000
FY 2004 budget request..........................................     537,000,000     564,000,000      10,695,000               0         150,000         250,000          35,000   1,112,130,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation..................     +20,148,000     +19,361,000        +419,000          +7,000        -993,000         +51,000               0     +38,987,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.................     +10,000,000               0               0               0               0               0               0     +10,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A single appropriation has been provided to finance all 
salaries and related costs associated with administering the 
programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
except the Office of Inspector General and the Office of 
Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight. These activities include 
housing, mortgage credit and secondary market programs 
community planning and development programs, departmental 
management, legal services, and field direction and 
administration.
    The Committee recommends total funding of $1,122,130,000 
for the salaries and expenses of the Department, a net increase 
of $38,987,000 above the fiscal year 2003 level and $10,000,000 
above the request. The recommendation includes the following 
changes: $59,487,000 increase for inflationary increases 
necessary to support 9,330 full-time equivalents (FTE) and a 
$10,000,000 increase and an additional 75 FTE to support a new 
section 8 quality assurance office; offset by $30,500,000 in 
decreases for one-time expenses.
    Language is included in the bill setting forth the amounts 
and staffing levels provided for the various offices funded 
under this heading as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Office                        FTE            Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of Housing.....................           3,483      $323,061,000
Office of Public and Indian Housing...           1,745       183,209,000
Office of Community Planning and                   834        80,696,000
 Development..........................
Office of Policy Development and                   161        21,424,000
 Research.............................
Office of Fair Housing and Equal                   669        61,564,000
 Opportunity..........................
Office of Healthy Homes and Lead                    38         3,946,000
 Hazard Control.......................
Government National Mortgage                        70         7,923,000
 Association..........................
Departmental Management...............             189        21,084,000
Center for Faith-Based and Community                 8         2,630,000
 Initiatives..........................
Office of the Chief Financial Officer.             248        38,857,000
Office of the General Counsel.........             698        76,007,000
Office of Field Policy and Management.             530        53,436,000
Office of Administration..............             732       248,293,000
                                       ---------------------------------
    Total, Management and                        9,405    $1,122,130,000
     Administration...................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Department may reallocate funds and FTE between the 
amounts specified above for these offices only in accordance 
with operating plan and/or reprogramming procedures. Amounts 
provided are consistent with modifications made by the 
Department to the original budget submission to reflect the 
revised staffing distribution consistent with the corrective 
action plan submitted to the Committee in response to the 
significant over-hiring that occurred during fiscal year 2003. 
The Committee expects that the Office of the Chief Financial 
Officer's Office of Budget will be provided the necessary 
resources to implement the corrective action plan.
    In addition, the Committee has included an increase of 
$10,000,000 and 75 FTE for the Office of Public and Indian 
Housing to establish a Division of Quality Assurance for 
activities associated with the Section 8 voucher program.
    Consistent with modifications to the original budget 
submission, the object classification distribution, which shall 
also serve as the basis for operating plan and reprogramming 
changes is as follows:
          Personal Services--$888,234,000
          Travel and Transportation of Persons--$20,600,000
          Transportation of Things--$550,000
          Rent, Communications and Utilities--$135,555,000
          Printing and Reproduction--$3,900,000
          Other Services--$64,901,000
          Supplies and Materials--$4,999,000
          Furniture and Equipment--$3,200,000
          Indemnities--$200,000
    Public and Indian Housing Division of Quality Assurance.--
Includes $10,000,000 and 75 FTE to establish a Division of 
Quality Assurance with the Office of Public and Indian Housing. 
The Committee recommends the establishment of this new division 
to ensure accurate and timely data regarding the expenditure 
and projected future funding requirements for the Section 8 
voucher program. The Committee has also addressed the creation 
of this new division elsewhere in this report under the Housing 
Certificate Fund. The Committee recommendation includes 
$7,500,000 in Personal Services and $2,500,000 in Other 
Services object classifications for this purpose.
    Operating Plans/Reprogramming Requirements.--The Committee 
appreciates the need for management flexibility to allocate 
management and administrative resources or reorganize offices 
and programs to address changing requirements at the 
departments and agencies funded in the bill, including HUD. To 
provide such flexibility, while ensuring appropriate 
consultation and oversight, all Departments within the 
Subcommittee's jurisdiction are required to submit operating 
plans and reprogramming letters and reorganization proposals 
for Committee approval. On a number of occasions, the Committee 
has expressed its concerns that HUD has not adhered to these 
requirements and instead has reallocated resources among 
programs, projects and activities, reorganized offices and 
created new offices without prior notification and approval by 
the Committee. The Committee directs HUD to follow the 
Committee's requirements regarding operating plans, 
reprogrammings and reorganizations so that the Committee is 
kept informed of, and therefore is better able to respond to, 
changing requirements at the Department. HUD is reminded that 
operating plans or reprogramming requirements apply to any 
reallocation of resources totaling more than $500,000 among any 
program, project or activity as well as to any significant 
reorganization within offices or the proposed creation or 
elimination of any program or office, regardless of the dollar 
amount involved; and any reorganization, regardless of the 
dollar amount involved. Object classification changes above 
$500,000 also are subject to operating plan or reprogramming 
requirements. Unless otherwise specified in this Act or the 
accompanying report, the approved level for any program, 
project, or activity is that amount detailed for that program, 
project, or activity in the Department's annual detailed budget 
justification document. These requirements apply to all funds 
provided to the Department. The Department is expected to make 
any necessary changes during fiscal year 2004 to its current 
procedures and systems to ensure that it is able to meet the 
necessary operating plan and reprogramming requirements applied 
to other agencies funded in the bill.
    Funds Control/Financial Management.--To address long-
standing weaknesses in departmental compliance with 
appropriations statutes, regulations and OMB circulars and to 
improve funds control and financial management, the fiscal year 
2003 appropriations Act included a series of reforms. These 
reforms included language permanently establishing a Division 
of Appropriations Law within the Office of the Chief Financial 
Officer to provide guidance to the Department on all matters 
related to appropriations law, regulations and circulars, and 
included language permanently clarifying responsibilities 
within the Department for investigating and reporting on 
potential and actual violations of all appropriations laws. The 
Committee appreciates the Department's cooperation in 
implementing these permanent changes. In addition, the 
Committee commends the Department for the commitment it has 
demonstrated this year to put in place policies and procedures 
to strengthen funds control and departmental management. The 
Committee looks forward to continuing to work with the 
Department toward this goal.
    The Committee recommendation includes language clarifying 
that point of obligation of funds for purposes of funds control 
and determining violations under the Anti-Deficiency Act 
requires joint signatures on executing documents except in 
certain limited instances for those programs for which a joint 
signature may not be necessary or appropriate. It remains the 
Committee's intent that the Department recognize well-
established appropriations law related to the point of 
obligation of funds, and to encourage joint execution for 
obligation of funds whenever possible. The Committee has also 
included a technical amendment to the fiscal year 2003 Act to 
clarify this issue.
    Budget Submission.--For the last two years, the Committee 
has expressed repeated concerns to the Department regarding the 
adequacy of its annual Budget Justification submission in 
providing the necessary information to enable the Committee to 
understand and assess the Department's funding requirements and 
requests. For example, the Committee notes that the fiscal year 
2004 justification contained less than 13 pages of information 
on programs representing over half of the Department's entire 
budget. The Department is directed to develop and present the 
fiscal year 2005 Budget Justification submission in the 
traditional appropriations account structure with detailed 
information on the prior year, current year, and requested 
funding levels for each program, project, or activity funded 
within each account, and include a detailed narrative 
description of the proposed changes requested. The Committee 
reiterates that object classification displays are supplements, 
not substitutes, for detailed displays with funding for each 
program, project, or activity within each account. The 
Committee continues its direction regarding the budget 
justification for the Management and Administration account 
which is to include prior year, current year, and requested 
position, FTE, and funding levels for each program within each 
office, delineated by headquarters and field office components. 
The Department is directed to submit to the Committee no later 
than September 15, 2003, a template for its fiscal year 2005 
budget justification document that complies with this 
direction.
    The Committee notes that the Department provided a 
supplementary ``performance-based budget'' document for fiscal 
year 2004 that attempts to divide the Department's budget 
requests for programs across six broad strategic planning 
goals, including ``Strengthen Communities'', ``Embrace High 
Standards of Ethics, Management and Accountability'', and 
``Promote Decent and Affordable Housing''. The Committee 
considers this document to be a strategic planning document for 
departmental managers, rather than a detailed budget 
justification document. The Committee reminds HUD that the 
budget justification books are intended only for the Committees 
on Appropriations in order to provide further necessary detail 
on the budget request. The Committee directs the Department 
that it is not to submit or otherwise incorporate the strategic 
planning document or its structure into its fiscal year 2005 
Budget Justification submission to the Committee.
    Language is included in the bill, similar to language 
carried in prior Acts, which: (1) designates amounts provided 
from various accounts for salaries and expenses; (2) requires 
the Department to implement appropriate funds control and 
financial management procedures; (3) limits the total number of 
GS-14 and GS-15 positions in the Department; and (4) requires 
submission of a staffing plan.

                          WORKING CAPITAL FUND




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $240,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       274,504,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       276,300,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       -34,504,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       -36,300,000


    The Working Capital Fund was established pursuant to 42 
U.S.C. 3535 to provide necessary capital for the development 
of, modifications to, and infrastructure for Department-wide 
information technology systems, and for the continuing 
operation of both Department-wide and program-specific 
information technology systems.
    The Committee recommends $305,156,000 for the Working 
Capital Fund, a $44,448,000 decrease from the fiscal year 2003 
comparable level, of which $240,000,000 is provided as a 
separate account to support Department-wide information 
technology systems activities. Transfers from the following 
accounts to support program-specific information technology 
systems provides an additional $65,156,000:
          FHA, Mutual mortgage insurance fund--$20,744,000
          FHA, General and special risk insurance fund--
        $16,946,000
          Community development fund--$4,900,000
          HOME investment partnerships program--$2,100,000
          Homeless assistance--$2,580,000
          Public housing capital fund--$10,610,000
          Native American Indian block grants--$2,720,000
          Housing certificate fund--$3,010,000
          Housing for the elderly--$470,000
          Housing for the disabled--$470,000
          Interagency Services--$306,000
          Office of Inspector General--$300,000
    The Committee remains committed to improving HUD's 
information technology capacity. To a large extent, both HUD's 
and Congress' ability to oversee the effectiveness of HUD's 
programs is undermined due to the failure of HUD's information 
systems to provide the information necessary to assess program 
performance and ensure effective resource management. The 
Committee understands that information technology systems 
improvements are organizationally and technically challenging 
endeavors. Effective development and implementation of such 
improvements requires strong oversight by the Department, 
strong program management, early and thorough planning, user 
input, clearly defined systems objectives and requirements, and 
appropriate milestones. Absent a clearly defined framework and 
implementation plan, the Committee is concerned that such 
endeavors will be vulnerable to uncontrollable cost growth and 
mission failure.
    The Committee continues to have concerns regarding the 
Department's progress in implementing several of its major 
information technology projects. The Department is directed to 
continue to work with the Committee to further develop and 
define its five-year IT requirements based upon the format 
provided to the Department on May 26, 2003. The Department is 
directed to provide an updated five-year IT plan consistent 
with such format no later than November 15, 2003. In addition, 
the Department is directed to submit to the Committee no later 
than September 15, 2003 on the status of, funds spent to date, 
and estimated fiscal year 2004 funding requirements for the 
following major projects: PIH Information Center (PIC), FHA 
Subsidiary Ledger, HUD Integrated Financial Management 
Improvement Project (HIFMIP), HUD Integrated HR and Training 
System (HIHRTS), and the Single Family Integration System.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Appropriation     FHA funds         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.................................     $76,080,000     $24,000,000    $100,080,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation..................................      73,674,000      23,343,000      97,017,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.................................      76,080,000      24,000,000     100,080,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation..................      +2,406,000        +657,000      +3,063,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.................               0               0               0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office of Inspector General provides agency-wide audit 
and investigative functions to identify and correct management 
and administrative deficiencies that create conditions for 
existing or potential instances of fraud, waste and 
mismanagement. The audit function provides internal audit, 
contract audit, and inspection services. Contract audits 
provide professional advice to agency contracting officials on 
accounting and financial matters relative to negotiation, 
award, administration, re-pricing and settlement of contracts. 
Internal audits evaluate all facets of agency operations. 
Inspection services provide detailed technical evaluations of 
agency operations. The investigative function provides for the 
detection and investigation of improper and illegal activities 
involving programs, personnel and operations.
    The Committee recommends $100,080,000 for the Office of 
Inspector General, an increase of $3,063,000 above the amount 
provided in fiscal year 2003. Of this amount, $24,000,000 is 
derived from transfers from FHA funds.
    Language is included in the bill, similar to language 
carried in prior Acts, which: (1) designates amounts available 
to the Inspector General from other accounts; and (2) clarifies 
the authority of the Inspector General with respect to certain 
personnel issues.

                         CONSOLIDATED FEE FUND

                              (RESCISSION)

    Section 7(j) of the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development Act establishes fees and charges from selected 
programs that are deposited in the fund to offset the costs of 
audits, inspections and other related expenses that may be 
incurred by the Department in monitoring these programs.
    The Committee recommends a rescission of remaining 
unobligated balances in the Fund, as requested.

             Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $32,415,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        29,805,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        32,415,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        +2,610,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) 
was established in 1992 to regulate the financial safety and 
soundness of the two housing government-sponsored enterprises 
(GSEs)--the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) 
and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac). 
The office was authorized in the Federal Housing Enterprises 
Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, which also provided 
the regulator enhanced authority to enforce these standards. In 
addition to financial regulation, the OFHEO monitors the GSEs 
compliance with affordable housing goals that were contained in 
the Act.
    The Committee recommends a total of $32,415,000 for OFHEO, 
to be derived from fees assessed to the GSEs and deposited into 
the Federal Housing Enterprises Oversight Fund. The 
recommendation represents an 8 percent increase over the fiscal 
year 2003 funding level in order to provide 16 additional FTE 
in fiscal year 2004. The fiscal year Committee notes that 
funding for OFHEO has increased by 67 percent to support a 44 
percent increase in staffing over the last three years.
    The Committee does not recommend proposed language as an 
administrative provision under this title to take funding for 
OFHEO off-budget.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    The bill contains a number of administrative provisions.
    Section 201 relates to the division of financing adjustment 
factors, as requested.
    Section 202 prohibits available funds from being used to 
investigate or prosecute lawful activities under the Fair 
Housing Act, which was proposed for deletion.
    Section 203 continues language to correct an anomaly in the 
HOPWA formula that results in the loss of funds for certain 
States, however requested language to make this provision 
permanent is not included.
    Section 204 extends a technical amendment included in the 
fiscal year 2000 Appropriations Act relating to the allocation 
of HOPWA funds in the Philadelphia and Raleigh-Durham 
metropolitan areas, similar to language requested.
    Section 205 authorizes the Secretary to waive certain 
requirements related to an assisted living pilot project, as 
requested.
    Section 206 continues language with technical 
modifications, requiring funds appropriated to be distributed 
on a competitive basis in accordance with the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989.
    Section 207 continues language, carried in previous years, 
regarding the availability of funds subject to the Government 
Corporation Control Act and the Housing Act of 1950.
    Section 208 continues language, carried in previous years, 
regarding allocation of funds in excess of the budget 
estimates.
    Section 209 continues language, carried in previous years, 
regarding the expenditure of funds for corporations and 
agencies subject to the Government Corporation Control Act.
    Section 210 continues language, carried in previous years, 
requiring submission of a spending plan for technical 
assistance, training and management improvement activities 
prior to the expenditure of funds.
    Section 211 continues language, modified from language 
carried in fiscal year 2003, requiring submission of quarterly 
reports regarding all uncommitted, unobligated, recaptured and 
excess funds in each departmental program and activity.
    The Committee does not recommend seven new administrative 
provisions requested in the budget to amend various 
authorization statutes related to minimum rents for public and 
assisted housing, service coordinators, repeal of a loan 
program, a new public housing loan program, land costs in the 
Colonias, the Interagency Council on the Homeless, and a new 
FHA sub-prime single family insurance program, and FHA interest 
payments.

                               TITLE III


                          INDEPENDENT AGENCIES


                  American Battle Monuments Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $47,276,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        35,017,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        32,400,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +15,259,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       +14,876,000


    The Commission is responsible for the administration, 
operation and maintenance of cemetery and war memorials to 
commemorate the achievements and sacrifices of the American 
Armed Forces where they have served since April 6, 1917. In 
performing these functions, the American Battle Monuments 
Commission maintains twenty-four permanent American military 
cemetery memorials and thirty-one monuments, memorials, markers 
and offices in fifteen foreign countries, the Commonwealth of 
the Northern Mariana Islands, and the British dependency of 
Gibraltar. In addition, five memorials are located in the 
United States: the East Coast Memorial in New York; the West 
Coast Memorial, The Presidio, in San Francisco; the Honolulu 
Memorial in the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific in 
Honolulu, Hawaii; and the American Expeditionary Forces 
Memorial and the Korean War Veterans Memorial in Washington, 
DC.
    The Committee recommends $47,276,000 for fiscal year 2004 
to administer, operate and maintain the Commission's monuments, 
cemeteries, and memorials throughout the world. The amount 
provided includes the budget request adjusted for a decrease of 
$1,000,000 from the productivity program including a reduction 
of $100,000 from personnel studies and $900,000 from 
improvement projects. Offsetting the decrease is an increase of 
$876,000 for costs associated with 20 additional FTE required 
because of work-rule changes in France. The Committee further 
recommends an increase of $15,000,000 for construction of the 
Normandy Interpretive Center at the Normandy American Cemetery 
in France. Of this amount, $10,000,000 is not available until 
September 1, 2004. The cemetery averages nearly two million 
visitors per year, and the existing facilities are over 40 
years old and inadequate to serve this large number of 
visitors. The new and expanded center will provide a fuller 
array of interpretive services to put the D-Day landings and 
the following battles in Europe in perspective as one of the 
greatest military achievements of all time. The Committee 
expects any remaining funds required to complete the center to 
be included as part of the fiscal year 2005 budget submission 
for the Commission.

             Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................        $8,550,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................         7,808,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................         8,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +742,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............          +550,000


    The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board was 
authorized by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 to 
investigate accidental releases of certain chemical substances 
resulting in, or that may cause, serious injury, death, 
substantial property damage or serious adverse effects on human 
health. The Board became operational in fiscal year 1998.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee is recommending 
$8,550,000, an increase of $692,000 from the level for fiscal 
year 2003 and an increase of $500,000 above the request.
    Again this year, bill language has been included which 
limits the number of career senior executive service positions 
to three.
    Consistent with fiscal year 2003, the Committee directs 
that of the amounts approved in this appropriation, the Board 
must limit transfers of funds between object classifications or 
program activities to not more than $50,000 without prior 
notification of the Committees on Appropriations. Changes from 
the budget request in excess of $250,000 shall be subject to 
the normal Committee reprogramming guidelines as outlined at 
the beginning of this report. No changes may be made to any 
expense as reflected in the budget justification, except as 
approved by the Committees on Appropriations, if it is 
construed by the Committee to be policy or change in policy.
    The Committee is not convinced that the workload of the 
Board justifies five full-time compensated Board Members. The 
Committee looks forward to working with the Board to discuss 
more efficient organizational structures to ensure that 
priority needs are met with the resources available.

                             EMERGENCY FUND




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................          $450,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................                 0
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +450,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............          +450,000


    The emergency fund provides a funding mechanism by which 
periodic accident investigation cost fluctuations can be met 
without delaying critical phases of the investigations. In 
fiscal year 2004, the Committee has provided initial funding to 
establish such an emergency fund. Amounts provided to the 
Emergency fund are available until expended and may be added to 
in future appropriations acts.
    The purpose of the fund is to address investigation costs 
that greatly exceed the amounts already budgeted and provided 
for in the current fiscal year and is not to be used to offset 
the agencies normal operating expenses. The Board is directed 
to notify the Committee in writing of any withdrawals from the 
emergency fund within 2 business days of such withdrawal. Such 
notification shall include the amount being withdrawn from the 
fund, the purpose and need for the withdrawal, and any relevant 
budget implications.

                       Department of the Treasury


              Community Development Financial Institutions


   COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS FUND PROGRAM ACCOUNT




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $51,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        74,512,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        51,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       -23,512,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............                 0


    The Community Development Financial Institutions Fund 
provides grants, loans and technical assistance to new and 
existing community development financial institutions such as 
community development banks, community development credit 
unions, revolving loan funds and micro-loan funds. Recipients 
must use the funds to support mortgage, small business and 
economic development lending in currently underserved, 
distressed neighborhoods. The Fund is also responsible for 
implementation of the Community Renewal Tax Relief Act of 2000.
    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $51,000,000 
for the program in fiscal year 2004, the same as the budget 
request. The Committee recommendation includes bill language 
designating $3,000,000 for financial and technical assistance 
for Native American, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native 
communities.

                   Consumer Product Safety Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $60,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        56,629,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        60,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        +3,371,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............                 0


    The Consumer Product Safety Act established the Consumer 
Product Safety Commission (CPSC), an independent Federal 
regulatory agency, to reduce unreasonable risk of injury 
associated with consumer products. Its primary responsibilities 
and overall goals are: to protect the public against 
unreasonable risk of injury associated with consumer products; 
to develop uniform safety standards for consumer products, 
minimizing conflicting State and local regulations; and to 
promote research into prevention of product-related deaths, 
illnesses, and injuries.
    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $60,000,000 
for fiscal year 2004 the same level as requested and an 
increase of $3,371,000 over the fiscal year 2003 appropriation.

             Corporation for National and Community Service


       NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAMS OPERATING EXPENSES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $363,452,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       326,211,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       472,742,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +37,241,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......      -109,290,000


    The Corporation for National and Community Service was 
established by the National and Community Service Trust Act of 
1993 to enhance opportunities for national and community 
service and provide national service educational awards. The 
Corporation makes grants to States, institutions of higher 
education, public and private nonprofit organizations, and 
others to create service opportunities for a wide variety of 
individuals through full-time national and community service 
programs. Funds for the Volunteers in Service to America and 
the National Senior Service Corps are provided in the Labor-
Health and Human Services-Education Appropriations bill.
    The Committee is completely frustrated at the financial 
situation created by the lack of financial and grant program 
accountability at the Corporation, even after years of 
providing funds specifically for the purpose of grant 
management and assurances made by the Corporation during the 
conference on the 2003 Act that the Corporation was on the path 
of reform. The Committee is recommending funding for the 
Corporation in fiscal year 2004, but is also expecting thorough 
reforms of its systems.
    The recent funding fiasco at the Corporation has been years 
in the making. Information provided to this Committee in the 
course of budget and oversight hearings and justifications by 
the Corporation and its officers have been inaccurate. A review 
of enrollment information reported in budget justifications and 
hearing transcripts compared to the actual enrollment numbers 
the Corporation provides today, show that for the past five 
years the Corporation has been unable to account accurately for 
its resources, obligations, or volunteers. The Corporation's 
Fiscal 2002 Budget Estimate and Performance Plan (the ``Plan'') 
reports that 40,334 volunteers were enrolled in the National 
Service Trust in 1999. However, a recent accounting reveals 
that the Corporation actually enrolled 48,000 in fiscal year 
1999. The 2002 Plan reports that 48,000 volunteers were 
enrolled in 2000, 5,000 less than the actual enrollment of 
53,000. The 2002 Plan further states that the fiscal year 2001 
appropriation will support the same number of volunteers as 
2000, or 48,000. However, the Corporation actually enrolled 
59,200 in 2001. Further, the 2002 plan proposes to the Congress 
that AmeriCorps will remain at 48,000 volunteers in 2002. In 
reality, the Corporation made commitments in 2002 for a record 
number of 67,000 volunteers.
    In 2003, the over obligations and program mismanagement of 
the Corporation came to a head and the Corporation had to pause 
enrollments and request a deficiency appropriation from the 
Congress of $64,000,000 to cover the shortage. The Congress and 
this Committee have tried diligently to help the Corporation 
out of its financial mess. First, the Committee provided 
$275,000,000 in Public Law 108-7 to support 50,000 volunteers 
based on financial estimates provided by the Corporation. The 
Committee hoped that fiscal year 2003 would be one of 
stabilization, enabling the Corporation to make a new, strong 
start in 2004.
    Second, the Committee provided $64,000,000 in Public Law 
108-11 based on an administration request to cover the shortage 
in the National Service Trust. The Committee notes that the 
conditions of the deficiency appropriation have not yet been 
met and so the $64,000,000 has not yet been released to the 
Corporation.
    Third, the Congress acted quickly to change the investment 
requirements for the National Service Trust and Public Law 108-
45 now allows the Corporation to achieve enrollment of the 
50,000 volunteers for the same appropriation to the Trust.
    Today, the Corporation is asking for a dramatic increase in 
resources and flexibility to enroll a record number of 
volunteers for fiscal year 2004. However, the financial 
disarray of the Corporation, the absence of accuracy in the 
Corporation's budget justifications and testimony, the 
transitioning leadership at the Corporation, and the lack of 
reform and accountability in the grant and financial programs 
do not leave the Committee with the sense that a large increase 
in available funds will be well managed or appropriate at this 
time. To that end, the Committee's recommendation includes 
resources and limitations designed to get the Corporation on 
track by providing a total of $363,452,000 for operating 
expenses. The Committee identified regular AmeriCorps programs 
and financial reform as the priorities for funding in fiscal 
year 2004.
    The Committee recommendation includes $30,500,000 for 
administration of the Corporation's grant programs, of which 
$15,000,000 is for the Corporation, $13,000,000 is for the 
state commissions, and 2,500,000 is for the Office of the Chief 
Financial Officer to continue the oversight and implementation 
of financial management reforms.
    The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for subtitle B grants, 
which fund the Learn and Serve programs $3,000,000 less than 
the request, a reduction taken without prejudice.
    The Committee recommends $244,352,000 for subtitle C 
grants, which fund the competitive and formula state grants, of 
which not more than $50,000,000 shall be for national direct 
service programs. In addition, the Committee recommendation 
includes no less than $24,000,000 for the National Civilian 
Community Corps. The Committee has provided language 
authorizing the Corporation to fund education award only grants 
out of subtitle C authority. In creating the funding 
recommendation, the Committee assumes that roughly $3,900,000 
will be spent on education award only grants and $240,452,000 
will be spent on national and state grants.
    The Committee recommends $6,100,000 for subtitle H grants 
which fund innovation and demonstration activities. The 
Committee has provided $500,000 for Martin Luther King Day of 
Service grants, $200,000 for unified state plan activities, 
$5,000,000 for disability programs, $300,000 for recruitment 
activities related to the National Senior Service Corps, and 
$100,000 for literacy programs. The Committee suggests that in 
the future, USA Freedom Corps activities should be funded in 
the budget justifications for that office. The Committee notes 
an absence of budget information for each of the programs and 
projects proposed for funding in 2004. The Committee directs 
the Corporation to include detailed funding levels for each 
initiative, both current and proposed, in the 2005 budget 
justification.
    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for America's Promise 
for capacity building and $10,000,000 for the Points of Light 
Foundation, of which $2,500,000 may be used for the endowment. 
The Committee did not earmark funding for Teach for America 
(TFA) simply because the Committee is committed to reducing the 
number of earmarks in this account. TFA is encouraged to apply 
for the funds available through the regular competitive and 
formula grant funding opportunities.
    The Committee recommends $3,500,000 for audit and 
evaluation activities and directs the Corporation to use these 
funds to assist grantees develop their performance measurement 
criteria.
    The Committee directs the Corporation to undertake a 
thorough review of its grant programs and financial systems and 
submit a comprehensive report not less than 90 days after 
enactment of this Act detailing a plan for reform and 
accountability. The Corporation will not compete, consider, 
negotiate, or award any grant for fiscal year 2004 funds until 
the Corporation submits the reform report and implements a 
corrective action plan. Further, the Corporation will not award 
a grant to a grantee unless the program office has registered 
with the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) the amount of each grant 
and the number of FTE associated with each grant. The CFO will 
provide the Committees on Appropriations a quarterly report on 
1) the individual grants awarded during the quarter, 2) the 
total amount of grant awards year to date, 3) the number of FTE 
awarded for each grant, and 4) the total number of FTE awarded 
year to date. In addition, the Committee directs the 
Corporation to reject from consideration any grant applications 
from organizations which enlist or hire volunteers for 2004 
prior to receiving a signed grant agreement awarding fiscal 
year 2004 funds.
    The Committee directs the Corporation to submit an 
operating plan within 90 days of enactment of this bill and 
abide by the reprogramming requirements outlined at the 
beginning of this report.

                         National Service Trust





Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $110,771,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       100,000,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       120,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        10,771,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......         9,229,000


    The National Service Trust (Trust) provides a secure 
repository for education awards earned by eligible participants 
who successfully complete a term of service in the AmeriCorps 
State and National, VISTA and National Civilian Community Corps 
programs. The current amount is of an education award is $4,725 
for a minimum of 1,700 hours of service (full-time), $2,362.50 
for a minimum of 900 hours of service (part-time), and $1,000 
to $1,800 for reduce part-time awards. Education awards are 
eligible for payment of qualified student loans, educational 
expenses at a qualifying institution of higher education, 
expenses incurred in participation of an approved school-to-
work program, or interest accrued on qualified student loans in 
forbearance while involved in AmeriCorps programs. In addition, 
the Trust provides a number of college scholarships to high 
school students for performing service in their community.
    The Committee recommends $110,771,000 for the Trust, an 
increase of $10,771,000 over last year's appropriation and 
$9,229,000 below the budget request. This funding level will 
support the enrollment of 55,000 new volunteers in the Trust in 
2004, a deposit of $10,000,000 in the National Service Trust 
Reserve as mandated by Public Law 108-45, and $5,000,000 for 
national service scholarships for high school students.
    The 2003 fiscal year appropriation included a statutory 
limitation of 50,000 enrollees in the Trust. The Committee was 
hopeful that the Corporation would demonstrate a level of 
competence in managing the programs under its jurisdiction and 
tried to support those efforts by providing an additional 
$64,000,000 as a deficiency appropriation to the Trust in 
Public Law 108-11 and endorsing passage of Public Law 108-45 to 
fix the accounting problems of the Trust. However, the 
Committee has seen little evidence during 2003 that the 
Corporation has its grant programs and financial and management 
control systems in place to truly account for the resources in 
the agency. Therefore, the Committee is recommending a 
statutory limitation of 55,000 enrollees in the Trust in 2004 
in order to ensure that Trust funds will not be over obligated 
again.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................        $6,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................         5,961,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................         5,108,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........            39,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......           892,000


    The Office of Inspector General is authorized by the 
Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended. This Office provides 
an independent assessment of all Corporation operations and 
programs, including those of the Volunteers in Service to 
America and the National Senior Service Corps, through audits, 
investigations, and other proactive projects.
    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,000,000 for 
fiscal year 2004, $39,000 over the prior year level and 
$892,000 over the budget request.

               U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $15,938,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        14,233,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        16,220,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        +1,705,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......          -282,000


    The Veterans' Judicial Review Act established the Court of 
Appeals for Veterans Claims. The Court reviews appeals from 
Department of Veterans Affairs claimants seeking review of a 
benefit denial. The Court has the authority to overturn 
findings of fact, regulations and interpretations of law.
    The bill includes $15,938,000 for the Court of Appeals for 
Veterans Claims in fiscal year 2004, an increase of $1,7056,000 
above the current year appropriation and $282,000 below the 
budget request.
    The bill also identifies $1,175,000 of the funds provided 
to fully fund the pro bono representation program.
    The Committee is not recommending funds for purchasing all 
public spaces in the parking garage of the private building 
that currently houses the Court. The Committee strongly urges 
the Court to continue working with the General Services 
Administration, the building owners, and the other tenants to 
come to an agreeable solution. If a solution is not agreed to, 
the Committee recommends the Court look for alternative Federal 
office space to meet its needs.

                      Department of Defense--Civil


                       Cemeterial Expenses, Army


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $25,961,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        32,234,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        25,961,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        -6,273,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    The Secretary of the Army is responsible for the 
administration, operation and maintenance of Arlington National 
Cemetery and the Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery. 
At the close of fiscal year 2002, the remains of 295,799 
persons were interred/inured in these cemeteries. There were 
4,022 interments and 2,283 inurnments in fiscal year 2002. It 
is projected that there will be 3,925 interments and 2,775 
inurnments in fiscal year 2003. In addition to its principal 
function as a national cemetery, Arlington is the site of 
approximately 3,100 nonfuneral ceremonies each year and has 
approximately 4,000,000 visitors annually.
    The Committee recommends $25,961,000 for operations and 
maintenance of the Cemetery, a decrease of $6,273,000 from the 
fiscal year 2003 funding level and equal to the budget request. 
In the past, the Committee has provided additional funds over 
the budget requests to address construction and maintenance 
issues. The funding decrease from last year is not a cut to 
operating and current maintenance plans.

                Department of Health and Human Services


                     National Institutes of Health


          NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $80,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        83,528,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        78,744,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        -3,528,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......        +1,256,000


    The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 
(NIEHS), an agency within the National Institutes of Health, 
was authorized in section 311(a) of the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 
to conduct certain research and worker training activities 
associated with the nation's Hazardous Substance Superfund 
program.
    For fiscal year 2004 the Committee has recommended a 
funding level of $80,000,000, an increase of $1,256,000 above 
the budget request. This amount represents a decrease of 
$3,528,000 from the fiscal year 2003 level because of one-time 
expenses provided for in fiscal year 2003. The Committee 
directs that funds be divided between the research and the 
worker training programs in the same proportions as in the 
budget request.
    The Committee urges NIEHS to collaborate with the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency at the Department of Homeland 
Security with regard to studies already being conducted on the 
long-term health effects following the World Trade Center 
disaster.

            Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry


            TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC HEALTH




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $73,467,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        82,262,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        73,467,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        -8,795,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 
(ATSDR), an agency of the Public Health Service, was created in 
section 104(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. The ATSDR's primary 
mission is to conduct surveys and screening programs to 
determine relationships between exposure to toxic substances 
and illness. Other activities include the maintenance and 
annual update of a list of hazardous substances most commonly 
found at Superfund sites, the preparation of toxicological 
profiles on each such hazardous substance, consultations on 
health issues relating to exposure to hazardous or toxic 
substances, and the development and implementation of certain 
research activities related to ATSDR's mission.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee has recommended a 
funding level of $73,467,000, a decrease of $8,795,000 from the 
fiscal year 2003 funding level and the same as the budget 
request.
    The Committee encourages ATSDR to continue to provide 
adequate funds for minority health professions, as well as for 
continuation of a health effects study on the consumption of 
Great Lakes fish.
    Within the amount provided, the Committee urges ATSDR to 
assist the New York State Department of Health, in consultation 
with community residents, in public health activities related 
to potential exposure to volatile organic compounds in the 
Village of Endicott, New York.

                    Environmental Protection Agency





Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $8,005,097,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     8,078,705,000
Fiscal year 2003 budget request.......................     7,630,538,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       -73,608,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......      +374,559,000


    The Environmental Protection Agency was created by 
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, which consolidated nine 
programs from five different agencies and departments. Major 
EPA programs include air and water quality, drinking water, 
hazardous waste, research, pesticides, radiation, toxic 
substances, enforcement and compliance assurance, pollution 
prevention, oil spills, Superfund, Brownfields, and the Leaking 
Underground Storage Tank (LUST) program. In addition, EPA 
provides Federal assistance for wastewater treatment, sewer 
overflow control, drinking water facilities, and other water 
infrastructure projects. The agency is responsible for 
conducting research and development, establishing environmental 
standards through the use of risk assessment and cost-benefit 
analysis, monitoring pollution conditions, seeking compliance 
through a variety of means, managing audits and investigations, 
and providing technical assistance and grant support to states 
and tribes, which are delegated authority for actual program 
implementation. Under existing statutory authority, the Agency 
may contribute to specific homeland security efforts and, 
additionally, may participate in some international 
environmental activities.
    Among the statutes for which the Environmental Protection 
Agency has sole or significant oversight responsibilities are:
          National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as 
        amended.
          Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, 
        as amended.
          Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended.
          Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
          Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, as amended.
          Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 
        1972, as amended.
          Oil Pollution Act of 1990.
          Public Health Service Act (Title XIV), as amended.
          Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended.
          Clean Air Act, as amended.
          Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended.
          Bioterrorism Act of 2002.
          Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 
        and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended.
          Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields 
        Revitalization Act of 2001 (amending CERCLA).
          Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 
        1986.
          Pollution Prevention Act of 1990.
          Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee has recommended a total 
program and support level of $8,005,097,000, a decrease of 
$73,608,000 below last year's appropriated level and an 
increase of $374,559,000 above the budget request.
    Of the amounts approved in the following appropriations 
accounts, the Agency must limit transfers of funds between 
objectives to not more than $500,000, except as specifically 
noted, without prior approval of the Committee. No changes may 
be made to any account or objective except as approved by the 
Committee, if it is construed to be policy or a change in 
policy. Any activity or program cited in the report, including 
specific funding amounts, shall be construed as the position of 
the Committee and should not be subject to reductions or 
reprogramming without prior approval of the Committee, unless 
adjusted by the subsequent Conference Report. It is the intent 
of the Committee that all carryover funds in the various 
appropriations accounts are subject to the normal reprogramming 
requirements outlined above. The Agency is expected to comply 
with all normal rules and regulations in carrying out these 
directives. Reprogramming requests associated with States and 
Tribes applying for Partnership Grants do not need to be 
submitted to the Committee for approval should such grants 
exceed the normal reprogramming limitations. Finally, the 
Committee wishes to continue to be notified regarding 
reorganizations of offices, programs, or activities prior to 
the planned implementation of such reorganizations.

                         SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation \1\ ..................      $767,115,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       715,579,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       731,483,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +51,536,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       +35,632,000


\1\ Total does not include transfer of $44,697,000 from the Hazardous
  Substance Superfund.

    The Science and Technology account funds all Environmental 
Protection Agency research (including Hazardous Substances 
Superfund research activities) carried out through grants, 
contracts, and cooperative agreements with other Federal 
agencies, states, universities, and private business, as well 
as on an in-house basis. This account also funds personnel 
compensation and benefits, travel, supplies and operating 
expenses for all Agency research. Research addresses a wide 
range of environmental and health concerns across all 
environmental media and encompasses both long-term basic and 
near-term applied research to provide the scientific knowledge 
and technologies necessary for preventing, regulating, and 
abating pollution, and to anticipate emerging environmental 
issues.
    The Committee has recommended an appropriation of 
$767,115,000 for Science and Technology for fiscal year 2004, 
an increase of $51,536,000 above last year's spending level, 
and an increase of $35,632,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee's recommendation includes the following 
changes to the funding levels included in the budget 
submission:
          1. $9,750,000 for the STAR Fellowship program, the 
        same as the fiscal year 2003 level.
          2. $7,000,000 for Communicating Research Information.
    The Committee's recommended appropriation includes the 
following increases to the budget request:
          1. +$2,500,000 for EPSCoR;
          2. +$4,000,000 for Water Environmental Research 
        Foundation;
          3. +$5,000,000 for the American Water Works 
        Association Research Foundation;
          4. +$2,000,000 for the National Decentralized Water 
        Resource Capacity Development Project, in coordination 
        with EPA, for continued training and research and 
        development of the program;
          5. +$2,000,000 for the Water Information Sharing and 
        Analysis Center (Water ISAC) to gather, analyze, and 
        disseminate sensitive security information to water and 
        wastewater systems;
          6. $500,000 to the University of California, 
        Riverside for development of vehicle emissions 
        measurement technology and improved models for 
        assessing the effectiveness of new technologies and 
        control strategies at the College of Engineering-Center 
        for Environmental Research and Technology (CE-CERT) 
        facility;
          7. $1,500,000 to California State University, Fresno 
        for the International Center for Water Technology;
          8. $500,000 to the City of San Bernardino, California 
        for the Lakes and Streams project;
          9. $100,000 to California State University--Fullerton 
        to enhance ongoing research related to water hazard 
        mitigation;
          10. $250,000 to the University of West Florida to 
        continue the Partnership for Environmental Research and 
        Community Health (PERCH);
          11. $750,000 for the University of South Florida 
        Study, Protection and Amelioration of Coastal 
        Environments;
          12. $250,000 to the University of Miami National 
        Center for Carribbean Coral Reef Research;
          13. $200,000 to the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus for 
        Chicago, Illinois for the Clean Air Counts Campaign;
          14. $500,000 to Western Michigan University in 
        Kalamazoo, Michigan for the Great Lakes Center for 
        Environmental and Molecular Science;
          15. $1,375,000 for the National Center for 
        Manufacturing Sciences in Ann Arbor, Michigan for 
        assisting EPA in meeting the Strategic Goals Program in 
        the metal finishing sector;
          16. $700,000 to the University of North Carolina at 
        Chapel Hill for a Green Chemical Manufacturing and 
        Processing research program;
          17. $200,000 for turfgrass research centers at the 
        University of Georgia and North Carolina State 
        University to develop turfgrass management strategies;
          18. $500,000 for the State of New Jersey pilot and 
        demonstration project for further development of 
        proven, affordable, and effective dredge contaminant 
        reduction technologies;
          19. $250,000 to LaGuardia Community College, New York 
        for an air quality study throughout the Queens and the 
        Bronx;
          20. $300,000 to Alfred University for the Center for 
        Environmental and Energy Research;
          21. $250,000 to New York University for the South 
        Bronx Air Pollution Study;
          22. $8,775,000 for the Environmental Systems Center 
        of Excellence at Syracuse University for research and 
        technology transfer in the fields of indoor 
        environmental quality and urban ecosystems 
        sustainability;
          23. $1,000,000 to the Syracuse Research Corporation 
        in Syracuse, New York, for the continuation of 
        environmental research at its Probability Risk 
        Assessment Center;
          24. $250,000 for the Consortium for Plant 
        Biotechnology Research;
          25. $200,000 for the National Environmental 
        Technology Incubator at Central State University for 
        technology transfer and commercialization activities;
          26. $900,000 for the Integrated Petroleum 
        Environmental Consortium;
          27. $250,000 to the Overbrook Environmental 
        Educational Center--a community based Technology and 
        Literacy center, with a primary focus on environmental 
        exploration and educational services--for environmental 
        protection and conservation efforts at the center's on-
        site Green Roof and Bio-lab;
          28. $350,000 to the University of South Carolina for 
        a geologic study for uranium groundwater contamination;
          29. $200,000 for Middle Tennessee State University 
        for research on cedar glades;
          30. $1,800,000 for the Mickey Leland National Urban 
        Air Toxics Research Center in Houston, Texas;
          31. $250,000 for the Texas Institute for 
        Environmental Assessment and Management at the 
        University of North Texas, Denton for watershed 
        research;
          32. $200,000 for the Texas Institute for Applied 
        Environmental Research at Tarleton State University in 
        Stephenville, Texas;
          33. $1,700,000 for the Canaan Valley Institute to 
        continue to develop a regional sustainability support 
        center and coordinated information system in the Mid-
        Atlantic Highlands;
          34. $1,000,000 for the Canaan Valley Institute in 
        close coordination with the Regional Vulnerability and 
        Assessment (ReVA) initiative and ORD Re+ program to 
        demonstrate, validate and report on critical ecological 
        hubs and corridors within the Mid-Atlantic Highlands 
        and approaches to Highlands ecological prioritization, 
        restoration and conservation. Research and educational 
        tools are to be developed using integrative 
        technologies to predict future environmental risks and 
        support informed, proactive decision-making to be 
        undertaken in conjunction with the Highlands Action 
        Program.
    The Committee has recommended a general reduction of 
$5,500,000 in this account.
    In addition to the funds provided through appropriations 
directly to this account, the Committee has recommended that 
$44,697,000 be transferred to ``Science and Technology'' from 
the ``Hazardous Substance Superfund'' account for ongoing 
research activities consistent with the intent of the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act of 1980, as amended.
    The Committee is fully supportive of the collaborative 
partnership of the EPA and the National Institutes of Health in 
their system of Centers for Children's Environmental Health and 
Disease Prevention Research. The Committee directs that EPA 
continue to support a competitive system of not less than 
twelve such centers and that it maintain the average level of 
funding for each center at not less than the historic level of 
approximately $500,000.
    The Committee recognizes the EPA's commitment to developing 
a Computational Toxicology program to reduce the cost and use 
of animal testing. The Committee further encourages EPA to 
focus resources on research, development and validation of new 
and revised non-animal and other alternative chemical screening 
and prioritization methods which reduce, refine or replace 
animal studies but might not be categorized as ``computational 
toxicology'' methods. Any such activities should be designed in 
consultation with EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and 
Toxic Substances. The Committee directs the Agency to provide a 
report to the Committee by March 30, 2004 regarding 
expenditures for fiscal year 2004 funds for research, 
development and validation of non-animal and other alternative 
methods by the Office of Research and Development.
    The Committee is aware of industry's voluntary decision, 
announced on February 12, 2002, to attend their EPA-approved 
FIFRA labels for Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA) wood 
preservation so as to prohibit treatment of wood for certain 
residential uses effective January 1, 2004. The Committee is 
also aware of the agency's interest to issue an assessment of 
the cancer risk posed to children by CCA treated decks and 
playsets despite the expressed sentiment of its own Science 
Advisory Board (SAB) that there is ``a high degree of 
uncertainty inherent in the assumptions and default measures 
proposed for use in the exposure assessment pathway,'' and 
that, ``the cumulative uncertainty in the resulting exposure 
[risk] assessment was likely to be substantial.'' To ensure EPA 
was able to make the most informed decision possible based on 
the best available science and most accurate data, the SAB 
recommended a biomonitoring study of children exposed to CCA be 
conducted, designed according to well-accepted epidemiological 
properties. The Committee shares the belief that such a 
biomonitoring study is necessary to properly evaluate risks to 
children from CCA treated structures and directs EPA to assist 
in the development, conduct, and review such a biomonitoring 
study before issuing any proposed or final risk assessment for 
CCA.
    In order to improve EPA's biomonitoring capabilities, the 
Committee directs EPA, in coordination with the Department of 
Health and Human Services, to request the National Academy of 
Sciences to conduct a study that would develop a research 
agenda for interpreting human biomonitoring data. The study 
shall identify the key uncertainties in estimating the 
exposure, health effects, and health risk potentially 
associated with biomonitoring data and shall propose research 
that will address these uncertainties. The study shall also 
include approaches to improve the future collection of 
biomonitoring data so that the data are more usable for health 
risk evaluations.
    The Committee continues to support the partnership between 
the EPA and the National Technology Transfer Center and directs 
that the Agency continue the cooperative agreement at the 
fiscal year 2001 level.

                 ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS AND MANAGEMENT




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $2,192,552,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     2,097,879,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     2,219,659,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +94,673,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......       -27,107,000


    The Environmental Programs and Management account 
encompasses a broad range of abatement, prevention, and 
compliance activities, and personnel compensation, benefits, 
travel, and expenses for all programs of the Agency except 
Science and Technology, Hazardous Substance Superfund, Leaking 
Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund, Oil Spill Response, and 
the Office of Inspector General.
    Abatement, prevention, and compliance activities include 
setting environmental standards, issuing permits, monitoring 
emissions and ambient conditions and providing technical and 
legal assistance toward enforcement, compliance, and oversight. 
In most cases, the states are directly responsible for actual 
operation of the various environmental programs. In this 
regard, the Agency's activities include oversight and 
assistance in the facilitation of the environmental statutes.
    In addition to program costs, this account funds 
administrative costs associated with the operating programs of 
the Agency, including support for executive direction, policy 
oversight, resources management, general office and building 
services for program operations, and direct implementation of 
all Agency environmental programs--except those previously 
mentioned--for Headquarters, the ten EPA Regional offices, and 
all non-research field operations.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee has recommended 
$2,192,552,000 for Environmental Programs and Management, a 
decrease of $27,107,000 below the budget request and an 
increase of $94,673,000 above the fiscal year 2003 funding 
level. For this account only, the Agency may transfer funds of 
not more than $500,000 between programs and activities without 
prior notice to the Committee, and of not more than $1,000,000 
without prior approval of the Committee. But for this 
difference, all other reprogramming procedures as outlined 
earlier shall apply.
    The Committee's recommendation includes the following 
changes to the funding levels included in the budget 
submission:
          1. $24,500,000 for the National Estuary Program, an 
        increase of $5,405,800 above the budget request;
          2. $5,500,000 for Environmental Justice programs, an 
        increase of $1,673,900 above the budget request;
          3. $2,675,000 for the Lake Pontchartrain Basin 
        Restoration Program, an increase of $1,675,000 over the 
        budget request;
          4. $112,000,000 for Management Services and 
        Stewardship;
          5. $35,000,000 for Regional Management;
          6. $26,500,000 for Information Technology Management;
          7. $2,750,000 for Data Standards;
          8. $33,500,000 for Regulatory Development;
          9. $10,000,000 for the Great Lakes Legacy Act;
          10. $27,500,000 for the EPM account's portion of the 
        Brownfields program;
          11. $14,000,000 for RCRA Waste Reduction;
          12. $2,500,000 for the Long Island Sound program 
        office, an increase of $1,522,000 over the budget 
        request.
    The Committee's recommended appropriation also includes the 
following increases to the budget request:
          1. +$18,250,000 for rural water technical assistance 
        activities and groundwater protection with distribution 
        as follows: $10,250,000 for the NRWA; $4,250,000 for 
        RCAP, to be divided equally between assistance for 
        water programs and assistance for wastewater programs; 
        $750,000 for GWPC; $2,000,000 for Small Flows 
        Clearinghouse; $1,000,000 for the NETC;
          2. +$1,500,000 for the Water Systems Council Wellcare 
        Program;
          3. +$1,000,000 for implementation of the National 
        Biosolids Partnership Program;
          4. +$2,500,000 for source water protection programs;
          5. +$4,000,000 for grants to interested States for a 
        long-term ambient monitoring and assessment framework 
        at relevant geographic scales to support water quality 
        management objectives;
          6. +$5,000,000 for a cost-shared grant program to 
        school districts for necessary upgrades of their diesel 
        bus fleets;
          7. +$3,000,000 for EPA's National Computing Center to 
        provide for the remote mirroring of all critical 
        information and related systems to achieve a Continuity 
        of Operations (COOP)/Disaster Recovery capability;
          8. $1,500,000 for the Highlands Action Program;
          9. $200,000 to the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution 
        Control District, California for its Operation Clean 
        Air public education program;
          10. $300,000 to the Golden Gate National Parks 
        Conservancy, California and National Park Service for 
        shoreline and habitat restoration;
          11. $750,000 to the Santa Clara Valley Water District 
        in California for groundwater remediation;
          12. $1,350,000 for the Southwest Center for 
        Environmental Research and Policy;
          13. $300,000 to the Florida Department of Agriculture 
        and Consumer Services for its Reclaimed Rainwater 
        Irrigation Project to demonstrate nonpoint source 
        pollution prevention;
          14. $1,200,000 to Florida Gulf Coast University for 
        the Institute of Coastal Watershed Studies;
          15. $2,000,000 for Osceola County, Florida to treat 
        invasive plants (Hydrilla and Hygophila) in the 
        County's watershed and drainage system;
          16. $100,000 for development and implementation of 
        the Georgia Water Planning and Policy Center, Offset 
        Banking Water Quality Improvement program;
          17. $400,000 to the Georgia Environmental Training 
        and Education Authority for a lagoon waste management 
        demonstration program;
          18. $175,000 to Cerro Gordo County, Iowa for 
        continuation of the initiatives related to the Clear 
        Lake Restoration Project;
          19. $200,000 to Storm Lake, Iowa for the Storm Lake 
        Water Quality Project;
          20. $100,000 to the Palouse Basin Aquifer Committee 
        for monitoring programs and pilot studies on how to 
        stabilize the deep aquifer water levels and ensure a 
        long-term water supply for the Palouse region serving 
        the Cities of Moscow, Idaho and Pullman, Washington, 
        the University of Idaho, Washington State University 
        and the surrounding areas in Latah County, Idaho and 
        Whitman County, Washington;
          21. $300,000 for the Selenium Information System 
        Project at the Idaho National Engineering and 
        Environmental Laboratory;
          22. $500,000 to the State of Idaho for Producers 
        Supply Co-op to carry out a program of environmental 
        response for fuel contamination cleanup;
          23. $800,000 for the Coeur d'Alene Basin Commission 
        to continue a pilot program for environmental response, 
        natural resource restoration and related activities;
          24. $1,500,000 to Boise State University for research 
        projects aimed at developing and demonstrating multi-
        purpose sensors to detect and analyze contaminants and 
        time-lapse imaging of shallow subsurface fluid flow;
          25. $600,000 to the Illinois Environmental Protection 
        Agency for the Fox River Watershed Management Program;
          26. $100,000 to the Lincoln Trail Area Development 
        District, Kentucky for the PRIDE in the Heartland of 
        Kentucky environmental study;
          27. $1,450,000 for the Olmsted Parks Conservancy for 
        a regional watershed demonstration in the Louisville, 
        Kentucky Olmsted Parks;
          28. $1,550,000 for the Louisville Waterfront 
        Development Corporation, a non-profit corporation in 
        Kentucky, for a riverbank stabilization project to 
        demonstrate pollution run-off reduction strategies;
          29. $400,000 for Red River Watershed Management 
        Institute at Louisiana State University-Shreveport for 
        research, education, and community service/outreach 
        related to watershed management in the area drained by 
        the Red River and its tributaries;
          30. $175,000 to Oakland County, Michigan for the 
        Clinton River Watershed Initiative including watershed 
        research and modeling, creation of a web-based database 
        on stream flow and water quality, bacterial source 
        tracking, and outreach activities;
          31. $1,000,000 for the Oakland County Drain 
        Commission, Michigan for water and sewerage 
        infrastructure management and planning;
          32. $125,000 for the Hypoxia Education and 
        Stewardship Project in Kansas City, Missouri;
          33. $250,000 for Wake County, North Carolina for a 
        groundwater protection program;
          34. $750,000 for the North Carolina Rural Economic 
        Development Center to develop a statewide Water and 
        Wastewater Assessment, Management and Security 
        Initiative;
          35. $850,000 for continued support of a North 
        Carolina Central University research initiative to 
        assess environmental exposure and impact in communities 
        of color and economically disadvantaged communities;
          36. $175,000 to the University of Nebraska, Lincoln 
        for development of a large-scale, system-level 
        mathematical model of critical water resources in 
        western Nebraska;
          37. $100,000 to the State of New Jersey for the New 
        Jersey Geographic Information System Smart Growth 
        Program;
          38. $100,000 for the Peconic Estuary Program Office 
        in Riverhead, New York for implementation of a 
        Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan;
          39. $150,000 in technical assistance grants to 
        Washington County, Rensselaer County, and Saratoga 
        County, New York, for Hudson River stewardship 
        programs;
          40. $200,000 to Orange County, New York for a county-
        wide water analysis;
          41. $200,000 to Madison County, New York for the 
        landfill gas to energy project;
          42. $200,000 for Columbia University in New York 
        City, New York for education and training related to 
        ongoing biomedical research on environmentally induced 
        cancers and immunological responses, at the Audubon 
        Biomedical Science and Technology Park;
          43. $250,000 to Wayne County, New York for the 
        development of a Sodus Bay comprehensive watershed 
        management plan;
          44. $250,000 to the Center for Environmental 
        Information in Rochester, New York for planning, 
        research and environmental analysis for a Lake Ontario 
        coastline remediation and restoration initiative;
          45. $300,000 for the NADO (National Association of 
        Development Organizations) Research Foundation for 
        environmental training and information dissemination 
        related to rural brownfields, air quality standards and 
        water infrastructure;
          46. $350,000 to the State University of New York 
        Environmental School of Forestry for research and 
        demonstration of contaminant mitigation strategies for 
        rural/suburban run-off affecting water quality along 
        the rural-urban interface in Central New York 
        watersheds;
          47. $350,000 to the State University of New York 
        Environmental School of Forestry for an Onondaga Creek 
        habitat restoration demonstration initiative;
          48. $750,000 to Cortland County, New York for 
        continued work on the aquifer protection plan, of which 
        $350,000 is for continued implementation of the 
        comprehensive water quality management program in the 
        Upper Susquehanna Watershed;
          49. $1,500,000 for continued work on water management 
        plans for the Central New York Watersheds in Onondaga 
        and Cayuga counties;
          50. $500,000 for Springfield, Ohio for environmental 
        restoration activities;
          51. $250,000 to Children's Hospital of Philadelphia 
        (CHOP) Community Asthma Prevention program to increase 
        awareness of environmental asthma triggers in the homes 
        of families in Philadelphia;
          52. $250,000 to the Caribbean American Mission for 
        Education Research and Action (CAMERA) in support of 
        their youth environmental stewardship and education 
        program;
          53. $200,000 to the National Energy Technology Center 
        for the Monogahela River Mine Pool Study in 
        Northwestern West Virginia and Southwestern 
        Pennsylvania;
          54. $500,000 to the City of Philadelphia, 
        Pennsylvania, for lead screening, testing, outreach and 
        education throughout the public school system;
          55. $500,000 to the Urban Education Research and 
        Retreat Center (UEDRARC) of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania;
          56. $500,000 to Environment and Sports Inc., a 
        nonprofit organization, for an environmental and 
        awareness program;
          57. $1,500,000 to the American Cities Foundation for 
        the Neighborhood Environmental Action Team program and 
        other community environmental efforts;
          58. $250,000 to the Brazos River Authority for the 
        Brazos/Navasota Watershed Management project;
          59. $50,000 to Frederick County, Virginia for a water 
        resources study in the counties of Frederick, Warren, 
        Clark and Shenendoah in Virginia and Berkley County in 
        West Virginia;
          60. $200,000 to Loudoun County, Virginia for 
        development of a comprehensive watershed management 
        plan;
          61. $200,000 to the Columbia Basin Groundwater 
        Management Area in Washington State for the Columbia 
        Basin Groundwater Management Area Study;
          62. $800,000 to the Polymer Alliance Zone's MARCEE 
        Initiative with oversight being provided by the Office 
        of Solid Waste;
          63. $2,000,000 for on-going activities at the Canaan 
        Valley Institute, including activities relating to 
        community sustainability.
    The Committee has recommended a general reduction of 
$30,213,000 in this account.
    The Committee supports the Agency's fiscal year 2004 
request for 100 FTEs over the fiscal year 2003 request level 
for the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, and has 
provided sufficient funding for this increase.
    The Committee supports the full budget request of 
$50,300,000 for the Energy Star Program.
    Within available funds, the Agency is directed to provide 
no less than last year's level of $9,160,000 for Environmental 
Education programs. The Agency is directed to distribute funds 
under the Environmental Education program proportionally in a 
manner consistent with the provisions of the National 
Environmental Education Act.
    The Committee has, within available funds, provided 
$2,000,000 for the eight Environmental Finance Centers, the 
same as for fiscal year 2003. Also from within available funds, 
the Agency is provided with $250,000 to continue development of 
BASINS models, GIS mapping, integration with other financial 
and planning tools, and incorporation of cost-effectiveness 
considerations into integrated priority ranking systems.
    The Committee has provided the full budget request for the 
High Production Volume Chemical Challenge Program, the 
Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program, and the Voluntary 
Children's Chemical Evaluation Program and directs that no 
reductions be proposed in the operating plan submission for 
these important programs.
    In addition to funds provided to the NRWA, RCAP, the GWPC, 
NETC, and the Small Flows Clearinghouse, the Committee has 
provided $2,500,000 for source water protection programs. The 
Committee intends that these funds be used to continue and to 
expand the statewide grassroots sourcewater protection programs 
being carried out by state rural water associations.
    The Committee has again provided funding for grants to 
States to establish a long-term ambient monitoring and 
assessment framework. Consistent with last year's direction, 
the Committee expects that the Agency may reserve up to five 
percent from the total appropriation to administer the program 
and enable it to provide technical assistance to States in 
developing and implementing multi-year ambient monitoring and 
assessment frameworks.
    The Committee has recommended $5,000,000 to continue a 
program initiated last year to provide grants to local school 
districts to reduce emissions from their buses. It is again the 
Committee's intent that the Agency should require, where 
appropriate, a modest cost-share commitment on the part of the 
recipient school district.
    The Committee has provided modest increases to the Data 
Standards and Information Technology Management programs over 
the fiscal year 2003 levels, but has not provided the budget 
request for substantial increases to these programs. The 
Committee does not believe the Agency has demonstrated 
sufficient environmental or management benefits to justify the 
requested increases to these programs.
    The Committee is concerned that the Federal Agencies 
continue to receive failing grades due to weaknesses in cyber 
security management. To address this weakness, the Committee 
believes Agencies can use vulnerability management as a means 
of securing critical computer networks. The Committee is aware 
of a new appliance-based technology that runs a hardened 
operating system and communicates through encryption using 
digital certificates for authentication. The technology will 
allow for greater certainty in identifying business risk, and 
eliminating those risks. The Committee directs EPA to provide 
no less than $1,000,000 within available funds to demonstrate 
this technology as part of its cyber-security architecture.
    The Committee supports continuation of funding for the 
Center for Agricultural Partnerships to help farmers increase 
use of environmentally sound pest management practices.
    The Committee commends the Agency for resolving a large 
number of pending Title VI environmental justice cases and has 
provided adequate funds to address the remaining backlog of 
cases.
    The Committee directs the Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency to file a report to the House 
and Senate Committees on Appropriation indicating whether the 
amendments adopted by the State of Florida to its 1994 
Everglades Forever Act have been approved by the Environmental 
Protection Agency as a change in water quality standards 
consistent with the requirements of the Clean Water Act. In 
addition, the Committee directs the Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency to file a report to the House 
and Senate Committees on Appropriations indicating whether the 
Environmental Protection Agency has approved the State of 
Florida's rule to set forth the numeric interpretation of the 
phosphorus criterion, as required under the Everglades Forever 
Act. The report shall contain EPA's analysis as to whether the 
numeric criterion will result in improvements to the quality of 
water entering the Everglades Protection Area and protect the 
federal resources located therein consistent with the Consent 
Decree entered in United States v. South Florida Water 
Management District.
    In 2000 the DC Circuit Court of Appeals held that EPA was 
improperly regulating recycling by using an overly broad 
definition of ``discarded material.'' The Committee encourages 
EPA to promulgate a rule in fiscal year 2004 revising the 
regulation of recycling under 40 C.F.R. Part 261, by limiting 
the definition of ``discarded material'' to materials that are 
``disposed of, abandoned or thrown away'' as defined by the 
court. The Committee also supports EPA's work to examine the 
effectiveness of the current comparable fuel program to 
supplement domestic energy sources with industrial materials, 
and encourages EPA to promulgate a rule in fiscal year 2004 
allowing additional industrial materials to be safely used as 
fuels.
    The Committee is pleased to note that in response to 
Congressional direction in the 2002 Committee report, EPA is 
submitting the current version of the Multi-Media, Multi-
Pathway, Multi-Receptor, Risk Assessment (3MRA) model, 
documentation and sample results from the model to the Science 
Advisory Board (SAB) for its review during fiscal year 2003-
2004. The Committee again strongly encourages the Agency to 
spend no resources to use the 3MRA risk model or any portion of 
the model for any regulatory or other similar purposes until 
recommendations of the Science Advisory Board are incorporated 
into the model.
    The Committee is aware that the U.S. is committed to the 
goal of the Montreal Protocol to phase-out all ozone-depleting 
substances, including CFCs in metered-dose inhalers (MDIs). The 
Committee is also aware that the leading patient and physician 
organizations, representing millions of American patients 
suffering from asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 
(COPD) and their health care providers, submitted a Citizen 
Petition requesting the first stage in the CFC MDI phase-out be 
the removal of albuterol from the list of essential uses at 21 
CFR 2.125(e). The Committee therefore urges EPA to work with 
FDA to complete its review of this petition and issue a 
proposed rule on albuterol non-essentiality no later than 
September 30, 2003. The health and environmental benefits of 
this action on albuterol referred to in the Citizen Petition 
can be protected and enhanced by corresponding international 
actions within the Montreal Protocol. The Committee therefore 
also urges EPA to consult with FDA on a final Protocol decision 
this year that deems albuterol non-essential for developed 
countries by 2005 and takes other steps to bring timely and 
effective closure to the Protocol's essential use exemption.
    The Committee notes that EPA has relied upon the Integrated 
Planning Model (IPM), a proprietary model, in developing its 
proposed mercury MACT rulemaking and in assessing other multi-
pollutant legislative proposals. The Committee wishes to ensure 
that the model conforms with the new Guidelines for Ensuring 
and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility and Integrity 
of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies that 
establishes a standard of ``reproducibility'' for 
``influential'' statistical results. The Agency is to report to 
the Committee no later than December 1, 2003 on the conformance 
of the IPM model with the guidelines.
    The Great Lakes Legacy Act, enacted in November 2002, 
authorizes appropriations for remediation of sediment 
contamination in the Great Lakes ecosystem. The Committee 
encourages EPA to promulgate rules implementing this program 
before the end of fiscal year 2004.
    The Committee notes that agency is developing a report on 
pending regulations on radon in drinking water in consultation 
with state water, air and radiation programs. Upon completion 
of this report, the Committee looks forward to working with the 
Agency on this issue.
    The Committee is concerned that EPA is not providing equal 
access to the benefits of the Energy Star Labeled Homes Program 
to all sectors of the affordable housing industry. The 
Committee strongly urges EPA to cooperate with the manufactured 
housing industry, including the Manufactured Housing Research 
Alliance (MHRA), to expand the Energy Star Labeled Homes 
program to include research planning and the development of 
approaches, tools and techniques for manufactured housing.
    The Committee is concerned that a proposed rule on 
pesticide spray drift could have significant negative impacts, 
of a random nature, on broad sectors of the production 
agriculture community, including decreased farm income. As the 
EPA proceeds with a potential rulemaking, the Agency should 
recognize the diverse geography of U.S. agriculture, and give 
sufficient consideration to the needs of the nation's 
agricultural economy and affected communities.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................   \1\ $36,808,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        35,766,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        36,808,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        +1,042,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0

\1\ Total does not include transfer of $13,214,000 from the Hazardous
  Substance Superfund account.

    The Office of Inspector General (OIG) provides audit, 
evaluation, and investigation products and advisory services to 
improve the performance and integrity of EPA programs and 
operations. This account funds personnel compensation and 
benefits, travel, and expenses (excluding rent, utilities, and 
security costs) for the Office of Inspector General. The 
appropriation for the OIG is funded from two separate accounts: 
Office of Inspector General and Hazardous Substance Superfund.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee recommends a total 
appropriation of $50,022,000 for the Office of Inspector 
General, an increase of $1,597,000 above last year's funding 
level and the same as the budget request. Of the amount 
provided, $13,214,000 shall be derived by transfer from the 
Hazardous Substance Superfund account.

                        BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $42,918,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        42,639,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        42,918,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +279,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    This appropriation provides for the design and construction 
of EPA-owned facilities as well as for the repair, extension, 
alteration, and improvement of facilities utilized by the 
Agency. The funds are to be used to correct unsafe conditions, 
protect health and safety of employees and Agency visitors, and 
prevent deterioration of structures and equipment.
    The Committee is recommending $42,918,000, the budget 
request, for Buildings and Facilities. This funding level 
represents an increase of $279,000 above the fiscal year 2003 
funding level. This recommendation provides for necessary 
maintenance and repair and improvement costs at Agency 
facilities and the ongoing renovation of EPA's new 
headquarters.

                     HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE SUPERFUND

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $1,275,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     1,264,614,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     1,389,716,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +10,386,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......      -114,716,000


    The Hazardous Substance Superfund (Superfund) program was 
established in 1980 by the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act to clean up emergency 
hazardous materials, spills, and dangerous, uncontrolled, and/
or abandoned hazardous waste sites. The Superfund Amendments 
and Reauthorization Act (SARA) expanded the program 
substantially in 1986, authorizing approximately $8,500,000,000 
in revenues over five years. In 1990, the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act extended the program's authorization through 
1994 for $5,100,000,000 with taxing authority through calendar 
year 1995.
    The Superfund program is operated by EPA subject to annual 
appropriations from a dedicated trust fund and from general 
revenues. Enforcement activities are used to identify and 
induce parties responsible for hazardous waste problems to 
undertake clean-up actions and pay for EPA oversight of those 
actions. In addition, responsible parties have been required to 
cover the cost of fund-financed removal and remedial actions 
undertaken at spills and waste sites by Federal and State 
agencies. Through transfers to the Office of Inspector General 
(OIG) and Science and Technology accounts, the OIG and the 
Office of Research and Development also receive funding from 
this account. Due to the site-specific nature of the Agency's 
Superfund program, site-specific travel is not considered part 
of the overall travel ceiling set for the Superfund account.
    For fiscal year 2004, $1,275,000,000 has been recommended 
by the Committee, an increase of $10,386,000 above last year's 
funding level and $114,716,000 below the budget request. Bill 
language is included which provides $200,000,000 of the 
appropriated amount from the Superfund Trust Fund and 
$1,075,000,000 from general revenues of the treasury. The 
Committee recognizes that the amounts provided from the trust 
fund and general revenues in this account may require 
adjustments prior to enactment of this legislation.
    Bill language has been included which transfers $13,214,000 
from this account to the Office of Inspector General and 
$44,697,000 to the Science and Technology account.
The Committee's recommendation includes the following program 
level:
    $890,763,000 for Superfund remedial, removal and other 
response/cleanup activities.
    $147,500,000 for enforcement activities.
    $140,000,000 for management and support.
    $13,214,000 to be transferred to the Office of Inspector 
General. Bill language is included which provides for this 
transfer.
    $44,697,000 to be transferred to Science and Technology for 
research and development activities. Bill language is included 
which provides for this transfer.
    $28,150,000 for the Department of Justice.
    $10,676,000 for other necessary, reimbursable interagency 
activities, including reimbursements to the Department of the 
Interior, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Occupational Safety 
and Health Administration, and the United States Coast Guard.
    The Committee has provided a $39,327,000 increase over the 
fiscal year 2003 level for Superfund response activities. The 
Committee recognizes the importance of cleaning up Superfund 
hazardous waste sites, and encourages the EPA to expedite 
cleanup efforts, especially those underway. In addition, the 
Committee encourages EPA to focus particular attention to 
remediate sites in the states with the largest number of 
Superfund sites.
    The Committee directs the EPA Inspector General to conduct 
an evaluation of Superfund expenditures at Headquarters and the 
Regions and recommend options for increasing resources directed 
to cleanup while minimizing administrative costs. As part of 
its analysis, the Inspector General should recommend options 
for enhancing the cost-effectiveness of cleanup contracting. 
The Inspector General should also evaluate whether the 
distribution of the Superfund resources among the various 
Agency Offices and Regions is appropriate to achieve the goal 
of expediting Superfund cleanups. The Agency is to report to 
the Committee on the implementation of the direction of this 
paragraph, identifying measures that the Agency will take to 
minimize overhead costs while accelerating cleanups with 
available resources.
    The Committee commends the Agency for the accomplishments 
of its Contaminated Sediments Technical Advisory Group (CSTAG), 
and believes that CSTAG can improve the Agency's consistency 
with national policy on contaminated sediment issues. The 
Agency is encouraged to expand CSTAG's role with an outside 
panel of experts who are involved in the evaluation process and 
remedy selection for contaminated sediments. Those named to the 
panel should have expertise in contaminated sediment management 
issues such as site assessment, risk assessment, ecological 
risk, sediment stability, and sediment remedial technology. To 
the extent practicable, the Agency should establish a 
preference for funding the cleanup of contaminated sites that 
have undergone CSTAG review.
    The Committee supports the national pilot worker training 
program which recruits and trains young persons who live near 
hazardous waste sites or in the communities at risk of exposure 
to contaminated properties for work in the environmental field. 
The Committee directs EPA to continue funding this effort in 
cooperation and collaboration with NIEHS. The research 
activities of NIEHS can compliment the training and operational 
activities of EPA in carrying out this program.
    The Committee is aware that the former Alameda Point Naval 
Air Station is currently being considered as a candidate for 
early transfer based on the pending agreement between the Navy 
and the City of Alameda for reuse, development, and 
preservation of the property. The Committee is further aware 
that the Administrator of EPA must approve the deferral of the 
CERCLA covenant. The Committee believes that the early transfer 
of the land and associated facilities in the City of Alameda 
could serve as a model for the military services of base 
conversion in an urban environment. Accordingly, the Committee 
expects the Administrator of EPA and the Secretary of the Navy 
to work cooperatively to achieve this early transfer in the 
most expeditious manner possible.
    The Committee understands that the Administrator of EPA 
visited Washington State and Idaho in August 2002 and expressed 
support for a combined effort on the part of the Federal 
government, the State of Idaho, and the State of Washington to 
clean up the Coeur d' Alene River Basin. While the Committee 
supports the criteria established for prioritizing funding for 
Superfund sites, it is also supportive of moving forward on a 
regional approach to cleanup in both Idaho and Washington. The 
Committee urges the Administrator to work with affected parties 
in the State of Washington on this issue.

              LEAKING UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK TRUST FUND




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $72,545,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        71,843,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        72,545,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +702,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    Subtitle I of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by 
the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, authorized 
the establishment of a response program for clean-up of 
releases from leaking underground storage tanks. Owners and 
operators of facilities with underground tanks must demonstrate 
financial responsibility and bear initial responsibility for 
clean-up. The Federal trust fund is funded through the 
imposition of a motor fuel tax of one-tenth of a cent per 
gallon, which generates approximately $170,000,000 per year.
    Most states also have their own leaking underground storage 
tank programs, including a separate trust fund or other funding 
mechanism, in place. The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust 
Fund provides additional clean-up resources and may also be 
used to enforce necessary corrective actions and to recover 
costs expended from the Fund for clean-up activities. The 
underground storage tank response program is designed to 
operate primarily through cooperative agreements with states. 
However, funds are also used for grants to non-state entities 
including Indian tribes under Section 8001 of the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee has provided 
$72,545,000, an increase of $702,000 over fiscal year 2003 and 
the same as the budget request.
    The Committee is aware of concerns expressed by several 
states that LUST funds not be used in a disproportionate manner 
for federal projects instead of state projects as anticipated 
by the authorizing statutes. The Committee concurs in this 
position of predominate use in the states and tribes and notes 
that its recommendation will allow for approximately 85% of the 
total appropriation to be used in the states and tribes.

                           OIL SPILL RESPONSE




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $16,209,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        15,480,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        16,209,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +729,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    This appropriation, authorized by the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act as amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 
1990, provides funds to prepare for and prevent releases of oil 
and other petroleum products in navigable waterways. In 
addition, EPA is reimbursed for incident specific response 
costs through the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund managed by the 
United States Coast Guard.
    EPA is responsible for directing all clean-up and removal 
activities posing a threat to public health and the 
environment; conducting site inspections; providing for a means 
to achieve cleanup activities by private parties; reviewing 
containment plans at facilities; reviewing area contingency 
plans; and pursuing cost recovery of fund-financed clean-ups; 
and, conducting research of oil clean-up techniques. Funds for 
this appropriation are provided through the Oil Spill Liability 
Trust Fund which is composed of fees and collections made 
through provisions of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, the 
Comprehensive Oil Pollution Liability and Compensation Act, the 
Deepwater Port Act of 1974, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands 
Act Amendments of 1978, and the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act, as amended. Pursuant to law, the Trust Fund is managed by 
the United States Coast Guard.
    The Committee recommends $16,209,000 for fiscal year 2004, 
an increase of $729,000 over the fiscal year 2003 level and the 
same as the budget request.

                   STATE AND TRIBAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $3,601,950,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     3,834,905,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     3,121,200,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........      -232,955,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......      +480,750,000


    The State and Tribal Assistance Grants account provides 
grant funds for programs operated primarily by state, local, 
tribal and other governmental partners. The account provides 
funding for infrastructure projects through the State Revolving 
Funds, geographic specific projects in rural Alaska and Alaska 
Native Villages and on the United States-Mexico Border, and 
other targeted special projects. In addition, the account funds 
Brownfields assessment and revitalization grants as well as 
miscellaneous categorical grant programs.
    The largest portion of the STAG account consists of two 
State Revolving Funds (SRFs), which provide Federal financial 
assistance to protect the nation's water resources. The Clean 
Water State Revolving Funds are intended to help eliminate 
municipal discharge of untreated or inadequately treated 
pollutants and thereby maintain or help restore this country's 
water to a swimmable and/or fishable quality. This program 
provides resources for municipal, inter-municipal, state, 
interstate agencies, and tribal governments to plan, design, 
and construct wastewater facilities and other projects, 
including non-point source, estuary, stormwater, and sewer 
overflow projects. The Safe Drinking Water State Revolving Fund 
program finances improvements to community water systems so 
that they can achieve compliance with the mandates of the Safe 
Drinking Water Act and continue to protect public health.
    This account also funds various categorical grant programs 
to ensure continued environmental protection nation-wide. Among 
these are non-point source grants under Section 319 of the 
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, Public Water 
System Supervision grants, Section 106 water quality grants, 
grants to improve targeted watersheds, Clean Air Act Section 
105 and 103 air grants, a program targeted to environmental 
information, Brownfields cleanup grants, and other grants 
utilized by the states, tribes, and others to meet Federal 
environmental statutory and regulatory requirements.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee recommends a total of 
$3,601,950,000, a decrease of $232,955,000 below the current 
fiscal year spending level, and $480,750,000 above the level 
proposed in the budget request.
    The Committee's recommendation includes the following 
program levels:
          $1,200,000,000 for Clean Water State Revolving Funds;
          $850,000,000 for Safe Drinking Water State Revolving 
        Funds;
          $50,000,000 for high priority U.S./Mexico border 
        projects;
          $25,000,000 for Alaska rural and Native Villages;
          $93,500,000 for Brownfields assessment and 
        revitalization grants;
          $8,250,000 for the National Community Decentralized 
        Wastewater Demonstration program;
          $1,180,200,000 for state and tribal program/
        categorical grants; and
          $195,000,000 for a program targeting grants to 
        communities for the construction of drinking water, 
        wastewater and storm water infrastructure and for water 
        quality protection.
    As was the case in past years, no reprogramming requests 
associated with States and Tribes applying for Partnership 
grants need to be submitted to the Committee for approval 
should such grants exceed the normal reprogramming limitations.
    The Committee has included bill language, as carried in 
previous appropriations acts, to clarify that drinking water 
health effects studies are to be funded through the science and 
technology account.
    The Committee has also included bill language, as requested 
by the administration and as carried in previous appropriations 
acts, to: (1) extend for an additional year the authority for 
States to transfer funds between the Clean Water SRF and the 
Drinking Water SRF; (2) waive the one-third of 1 percent cap on 
the Tribal set aside from non-point source grants; (3) increase 
to 1.5 percent the cap on the Tribal set-aside for the Clean 
Water SRF; and (4) require that any funds provided to address 
the water infrastructure needs of colonias within the United 
States along the United States-Mexico border be spent only in 
areas where the local governmental entity has established an 
enforceable ordinance or rule which prevents additional 
development within colonias that lacks water, wastewater, or 
other necessary infrastructure. Bill language has been included 
which provides specific dollar amounts for each of the above 
listed programs.
    Bill language has been included which stipulates that, 
consistent with section 603 of the Federal Water Pollution 
Control Act, as amended, $68,000,000 of the $1,200,000,000 
proposed for the Clean Water SRF program is to be made 
available by the States for interest-free loans that increase 
non-point and non-structural, decentralized alternatives, to 
expand the choices available to communities in their fight for 
clean water. The Committee continues to enthusiastically 
support this program, and believes that the States will be able 
to increase their participation in this program with the funds 
made available by this provision.
    From within the Committee's $50,000,000 recommendation for 
the United States-Mexico Border program, the Agency is expected 
to provide $2,000,000 for continuation of the Brownsville, 
Texas area water supply project, $7,000,000 for continuation of 
the El Paso, Texas area desalination and water supply project, 
and $1,000,000 for the City of Imperial Beach, California for 
an Enhanced Solids Reduction Pilot Project.
    The Committee has provided $8,250,000 for six specific 
grants under the National Decentralized Wastewater 
Demonstration program. The program, which has shown tremendous 
success in developing and transferring technologies which offer 
alternatives to centralized wastewater treatment facilities, 
also requires a cost-share whereby each grantee must provide 
25% of the project's total cost. The six projects included for 
funding are located in Seattle, Washington ($1,700,000); 
Blackstone Watershed, Massachusetts and Rhode Island 
($1,700,000); Boise, Idaho ($1,250,000); Pasquotank River 
Watershed, North Carolina ($1,700,000); Washington, D.C. 
($1,000,000); and Chagrin River Watershed, Ohio ($900,000). As 
in previous years, these projects were determined by non-
governmental, independent analysis based upon their unique and 
diverse geology and geography, their ability to provide the 
greatest technological diversity using limited financial 
resources, and the commitment of each community or regional 
area to find and fund appropriate alternative technologies to 
resolve their wastewater treatment needs.
    The Committee has not provided funding for a grant for 
drinking water infrastructure improvements in San Juan, Puerto 
Rico.
    The Committee has included bill language which makes 
technical corrections to grants provided to Wellsboro, 
Pennsylvania, Newton, Mississippi, and McComb, Mississippi in 
last year's bill.
    The Committee has provided $1,180,200,000 for state and 
tribal program assistance/categorical grants. The Committee's 
recommendation for each categorical grant follows:
          (1) $228,550,000 for air resource assistance to State 
        and local governments under sections 103 and 105 of the 
        Clean Air Act, including $10,000,000 for the five 
        State/Regional Haze planning organizations;
          (2) $11,050,000 for air resource assistance grants to 
        Tribal governments;
          (3) $8,150,000 for radon grants;
          (4) $200,400,000 for water pollution control agency 
        resource supplementation under section 106 of FWPCA;
          (5) $10,000,000 for beach grants to develop and 
        implement monitoring and information programs for 
        coastal recreation waters pursuant to the Beach 
        Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health Act of 
        2000;
          (6) $238,550,000 for section 319 of FWPCA non-point 
        source pollution grants, including programs formerly 
        eligible under the section 314 Clean Lakes program;
          (7) $20,000,000 for wetlands program development 
        grants;
          (8) $19,000,000 for water quality cooperative 
        agreements under section 104(b)(3) of FWPCA;
          (9) $15,000,000 for targeted watershed grants;
          (10) $102,600,000 for public water system supervision 
        grants;
          (11) $11,000,000 for underground injection control 
        grants;
          (12) $5,000,000 for Drinking Water Program State 
        Homeland Security Coordination grants;
          (13) $106,400,000 for RCRA financial assistance 
        grants;
          (14) $50,000,000 for Brownfields categorical cleanup 
        grants;
          (15) $11,950,000 for underground storage tank grants;
          (16) $13,100,000 for pesticides program 
        implementation grants;
          (17) $13,700,000 for lead risk reduction grants;
          (18) $5,150,000 for toxic substances compliance/
        enforcement grants;
          (19) $19,900,000 for pesticides enforcement grants;
          (20) $20,000,000 for the information exchange network 
        program;
          (21) $6,000,000 for pollution prevention incentive 
        grants;
          (22) $2,250,000 for enforcement and compliance 
        assurance grants;
          (23) $62,500,000 for Indians general assistance 
        grants; and
    The Committee has provided $228,550,000 for grants to state 
and local air quality agencies under sections 103 and 105 of 
the Clean Air Act. This level is equal to the budget request 
and $5,012,000 over last year's level.
    Section 106 pollution control grants are funded at a level 
of $200,400,000, equal to the budget request and $9,151,000 
over last year's level.
    The Committee has provided $238,500,000 for Section 319 
non-point source grants, equal to the budget request.
    Wetlands program development grants are funded at a level 
of $20,000,000, equal to the budget request and $5,130,00 over 
last year's level.
    The Committee has provided $102,600,000 for public water 
system supervision grants, an increase of $10,105,000 over the 
fiscal year 2003 level and a decrease of $2,500,000 from the 
budget request.
    The Committee has provided $62,500,000 for Indian general 
assistance grants, an increase of $5,404,000 over last year's 
level and equal to the budget request.
    The total Brownfields program level is $171,000,000, 
consisting of a total of $143,500,000 from two portions of this 
account, as well as the administrative portion of this program, 
which is funded in the EPM account at $27,500,000.
    The Committee has not provided increases for targeted 
watershed grants or the information exchange network program 
requested by the President. These programs have been provided 
with modest increases over the fiscal year 2003 level.
    The Committee has provided $180,000,000 for a targeted 
program making grants to communities for the construction of 
drinking water, wastewater and storm water infrastructure and 
for water quality protection. As in past years, these grants 
shall be accompanied by a cost-share requirement whereby 45 
percent of a project's cost is the responsibility of the 
community or entity receiving the grant. In those few cases 
where such cost-share requirement poses a particular financial 
burden on the recipient community or entity, the Committee 
supports the Agency's use of its long-standing guidance for 
financial capability assessments to determine reductions or 
waivers from this match requirement. But for the limited 
instances in which an applicant meets the criteria for a 
waiver, the Committee has provided no more than 55% of an 
individual project's cost, regardless of the amount 
appropriated below. Consistent with direction in the fiscal 
year 2003 Conference Report on this bill, the phrase ``terms 
and conditions'' referenced in the Bill Language includes the 
maximum 55% federal share, as well as the intended recipients 
and the specific project descriptions, as listed below:
          1. $85,000 to the City of Cedar Bluff, Alabama for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          2. $90,000 to the Town of Pennington, Alabama for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          3. $100,000 to the Fayette, Alabama, Water Works 
        Board for water system infrastructure improvements;
          4. $100,000 to the Limestone County Water and Sewer 
        Authority, Alabama for drinking water improvements;
          5. $100,000 to the City of Athens, Alabama for 
        wastewater system improvements;
          6. $100,000 to Lawrence County, Alabama for the 
        Bankhead Forest Water project;
          7. $100,000 to the City of New Hope, Alabama for 
        wastewater system improvements;
          8. $150,000 to the Coosa Valley Water Authority in 
        St. Clair County, Alabama for water infrastructure 
        improvements;
          9. $175,000 to the West Morgan-East Lawrence Water 
        and Sewer Authority, Alabama for water infrastructure 
        improvements;
          10. $175,000 to the City of Lineville, Alabama for 
        purchase and construction of a water tank;
          11. $200,000 to Walker County Commission, Alabama for 
        water line extensions in isolated areas;
          12. $200,000 to Colbert County, Alabama, for water 
        system improvements;
          13. $200,000 to the Utilities Board of the Town of 
        Citronelle, Alabama for water infrastructure 
        improvements;
          14. $225,000 to the West Lawrence Water Co-Op of 
        Mount Hope, Alabama for water system infrastructure 
        improvements;
          15. $250,000 to Attalla, Alabama, for sewerage system 
        improvements;
          16. $300,000 to the Town of Gordo, Alabama for 
        sanitary sewer expansion project;
          17. $300,000 to the Guntersville, Alabama, Water and 
        Sewer Board for the Sand Mountain water storage system 
        project;
          18. $300,000 to the Waterworks Board for the Towns of 
        Section and Dutton, Alabama for water system 
        improvements;
          19. $350,000 to the Town of Berry, Alabama for 
        construction of a wetlands treatment facility;
          20. $350,000 to the Chilton Water Authority in 
        Chilton County, Alabama for water infrastructure 
        improvements;
          21. $400,000 to Jackson County, Alabama for water 
        system improvements;
          22. $400,000 to the West Lauderdale County Water and 
        Fire Protection Authority, Alabama for construction of 
        a water treatment plant;
          23. $475,000 to Franklin County, Alabama for water 
        system infrastructure improvements;
          24. $500,000 to Hartselle Utilities for wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements in the City of Hartselle, 
        Alabama;
          25. $700,000 to Lawrence County, Alabama for 
        construction of a wastewater treatment facility;
          26. $850,000 to the Upper Bear Creek Water Treatment 
        Plant in Haleyville, Alabama, for water treatment plant 
        improvement project;
          27. $875,000 to the CREMS (Carlisle, Rockledge, 
        Egypt, Mountainboro, and Shady Grove) Water Authority, 
        Alabama for water system infrastructure improvements;
          28. $1,000,000 to the City of Florence, Alabama for 
        the rehabilitation of the Canal/Jones Hollow 
        Interceptor sewer lines;
          29. $100,000 to the Baxter County Water Facilities 
        Board, Arkansas for water and wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements;
          30. $125,000 to the City of Jonesboro, Arkansas for 
        developing drainage plans;
          31. $200,000 to the Faulkner County Public Utilities 
        Board, Arkansas for wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements for Lake Conway;
          32. $300,000 to the Fort Chaffee Redevelopment 
        Authority, Arkansas for water infrastructure 
        improvements;
          33. $300,000 to the White Mountain Apache Tribe in 
        Arizona to prepare a master plan for drinking water 
        infrastructure on the Fort Apache Indian Reservation;
          34. $400,000 to the City of Scottsdale, Arizona for 
        the Scottsdale Arsenic Removal Pilot Project;
          35. $600,000 to the City of Avondale, Arizona for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          36. $750,000 to the Town of Huachuca, Arizona for the 
        Effluent Recharge Project;
          37. $750,000 to the City of Tucson, Arizona for water 
        security infrastructure improvements;
          38. $100,000 to the City of Chino Hills, California 
        for a needs assessment study for 39 improvements to the 
        Los Serranos storm water drainage system;
          39. $110,000 to the City of East Palo Alto, 
        California for the East Palo Alto Master Water Plan 
        including water, wastewater and stormwater 
        infrastructure improvements;
          40. $175,000 to the City of Brisbane, California for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          41. $200,000 to the City of Colton, California for 
        stormwater infrastructure improvements as part of the 
        Comprehensive 3-5 Storm Drain Plan;
          42. $200,000 to the Los Osos Community Services 
        District, California for wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements;
          43. $200,000 to the City of Modesto, California for 
        the Ninth Street Corridor Storm Drain project;
          44. $200,000 to the City of Norwalk, California for 
        the Norwalk Reservoir Project;
          45. $200,000 to the City of Cudahy, California for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          46. $200,000 to the City of Bell, California for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          47. $200,000 to Marin County, California for the 
        Tomales Bay Wastewater Treatment Facility;
          48. $250,000 to the City of Long Beach, California 
        for storm water infrastructure improvements;
          49. $250,000 to the City of Westminster, California 
        for a water quality improvement pilot project;
          50. $250,000 to the City of Fort Bragg, California 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          51. $250,000 for the City of Gardena, California for 
        wastewater and stormwater infrastructure improvements;
          52. $275,000 to the City of Santa Ana, California for 
        the West Pump Station Facility Upgrade project;
          53. $300,000 to the City of Murrieta, California for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          54. $300,000 to the City of El Segundo, California 
        for sanitary sewer overflow infrastructure 
        improvements;
          55. $300,000 to the City of Santa Monica, California 
        for water infrastructure improvements;
          56. $300,000 to the City of Brisbane, California for 
        the Valley Drive Pump Station Replacement project;
          57. $350,000 to the Monterey County Water Resource 
        Agency in California for the Salinas Valley Water 
        Project;
          58. $350,000 to the City of Roseville, California for 
        water infrastructure improvements;
          59. $350,000 to the City of Vallejo, California for 
        infrastructure improvements for the Mare Island 
        Sanitary Sewer and Storm Drain System;
          60. $375,000 to the City of Huntington Beach, 
        California for the Alabama Storm Drain project;
          61. $400,000 to the Irvine Ranch Water District, 
        California for the San Diego Creek Watershed Natural 
        Treatment System;
          62. $400,000 to the County of Ventura, California for 
        implementation of the Calleguas Creek Watershed 
        Management Plan;
          63. $400,000 to the United Water Conservation 
        District, California for the River Park Reclamation and 
        Recharge Authority Groundwater Project;
          64. $400,000 to the City of Redding, California for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements for 
        the Stillwater Business Park;
          65. $400,000 to the City of Victorville, California 
        for water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          66. $400,000 to the City of Whittier, California for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          67. $400,000 to the City of Folsom, California for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          68. $400,000 to the City of Lodi, California for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          69. $500,000 to the City of Fresno, California for a 
        water conveyance project;
          70. $650,000 to Placer County, California for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          71. $750,000 to the San Diego Water Authority, 
        California for a water desalination program;
          72. $800,000 to the Olivenhain Municipal Water 
        District in Encinitas, California for water 
        infrastructure improvements;
          73. $800,000 to the City of Sacramento, California 
        for the Sacramento Combined Sewer System Improvement 
        and Rehabilitation Project;
          74. $800,000 to the Castaic Lake Water Agency, 
        California for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          75. $1,100,000 to the Mojave Water Agency, California 
        for the Mojave Desert Arsenic Demonstration project;
          76. $1,650,000 to the Cities of Arcadia and Sierra 
        Madre, California for water infrastructure 
        improvements;
          77. $250,000 to the North Pecos Water and Sanitation 
        District, Colorado for groundwater protection 
        infrastructure improvements;
          78. $500,000 to the Town of Rico, Colorado for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          79. $200,000 to the Town of Prospect, Connecticut for 
        water infrastructure improvements;
          80. $250,000 to the Southington Water Department, 
        Connecticut for its water supply and distribution 
        system improvement project;
          81. $250,000 to the City of Stamford, Connecticut for 
        stormwater management improvements for the restoration 
        of the Mill River ecosystem;
          82. $400,000 to the City of Danbury, Connecticut for 
        the West Side Sewer Interceptor;
          83. $400,000 to the City of New Britain, Connecticut 
        for the New Britain Water Filtration Plant Replacement 
        project;
          84. $400,000 to East Hampton, Connecticut for water 
        infrastructure improvements;
          85. $400,000 to the Metropolitan Washington Council 
        of Governments for its Regional Water System Security 
        Enhancement Program;
          86. $500,000 to the City of Wilmington, Delaware for 
        combined sewer overflow infrastructure improvements;
          87. $150,000 to the City of Safety Harbor, Florida 
        for water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          88. $175,000 to the City of Miami Gardens, Florida 
        for drinking water, wastewater, stormwater and sewer 
        infrastructure improvements;
          89. $200,000 to Citrus County, Florida for wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements for the Homosassa and 
        Chassahowitzka Water Collection System;
          90. $200,000 to the City of Hollywood, Florida for 
        water infrastructure improvements;
          91. $200,000 to Palm Beach County, Florida for 
        improvements at the Lake Okeechobee Regional Water 
        Treatment Plant;
          92. $200,000 to the Escambia County Utility 
        Authority, Florida for a wastewater treatment/water 
        reclamation partnership project;
          93. $240,000 to the City of Marathon, Florida for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements for 
        the Boot Key Municipal Harbor Development;
          94. $300,000 to Orange County, Florida for wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements in Holden Heights;
          95. $350,000 to the City of Tampa, Florida for the 
        South Tampa Area Reclaimed Project;
          96. $350,000 to St. Johns County, Florida for the 
        Stormwater and Septic Tank Replacement Project;
          97. $400,000 to the City of Tarpon Springs, Florida 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          98. $400,000 to Sarasota County, Florida for the 
        Phillipi Creek Septic Tank Replacement Project;
          99. $400,000 to the City of Key West, Florida for 
        stormwater infrastructure improvements;
          100. $400,000 to the City of Oakland Park, Florida 
        for the Kimberly Lake Drainage Project;
          101. $400,000 to the City of Riviera Beach, Florida 
        for stormwater infrastructure improvements for Lake 
        Worth Lagoon;
          102. $400,000 to the Town of Orange Park, Florida for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements for the St. 
        Johns River;
          103. $650,000 to the County of Putnam, Florida for a 
        Regional Wastewater System project;
          104. $800,000 to the City of Sweetwater, Florida for 
        stormwater and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          105. $800,000 to the City of Homestead, Florida for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          106. $800,000 to the Southwest Florida Water 
        Management District for the Upper Peace River Watershed 
        Restoration Initiative;
          107. $2,200,000 for St. Johns Rivers Water Management 
        District, Florida to integrate alternative water 
        supplies;
          108. $10,000,000 to the Southwest Florida Water 
        Management District for continuation of the Tampa Bay 
        Reservoir Project;
          109. $110,000 to the City of Helena, Georgia for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          110. $350,000 to the Liberty County Development 
        Authority, Georgia for water and wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements for the Liberty County 
        Coastal Megapark;
          111. $400,000 to the City of Roswell, Georgia for the 
        Big Creek Watershed Project;
          112. $500,000 to the City of Forsyth, Georgia for 
        wastewater treatment and collection upgrades;
          113. $500,000 to the City of Atlanta, Georgia for the 
        West Area Combined Sewer project;
          114. $600,000 to Gwinnett County, Georgia for water 
        and wastewater infrastructure improvements for the 
        Liberty Heights revitalization project;
          115. $800,000 for the Metropolitan North Georgia 
        Water Planning District for water and wastewater 
        infrastructure improvement projects;
          116. $1,000,000 to the Metropolitan North Georgia 
        Water Planning District for water and wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements for the City of Atlanta 
        Nancy Creek project;
          117. $2,250,000 for Columbus Water Works, Columbus, 
        Georgia for its Biosolids Flow-Through Thermophilic 
        Treatment Demonstration Project;
          118. $300,000 to the Guam Waterworks Authority for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          119. $200,000 to Sioux City, Iowa for improvements at 
        the Sioux City Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility;
          120. $200,000 to the City of Postville, Iowa for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          121. $300,000 to the City of Des Moines, Iowa for the 
        Des Moines River Outfall and Overflow Sanitary Sewer 
        project;
          122. $350,000 to the City of Dubuque, Iowa for 
        implementation of a storm management plan;
          123. $500,000 to the City of Ottumwa, Iowa for the 
        South Ottumwa Sewer Separation project;
          124. $600,000 for the Mason City Water Treatment 
        Plant in Mason City, Iowa for water infrastructure 
        improvements;
          125. $650,000 to the City of Davenport, Iowa for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements for 
        the Davenport Westside Diversion Tunnel;
          126. $400,000 to the City of Middleton, Idaho for its 
        water and sewer utility extension and regional lift 
        station project;
          127. $500,000 to the City of McCammon, Idaho for 
        wastewater system improvements;
          128. $900,000 to the City of Jerome, Idaho for 
        extension of sewer lines;
          129. $100,000 to the Village of Carbon Hill, Illinois 
        for water infrastructure improvements;
          130. $125,000 to the Village of Romeoville, Illinois 
        for stormwater infrastructure improvements;
          131. $175,000 to the City of Lexington, Illinois for 
        the design engineering and construction of a wastewater 
        treatment plant;
          132. $200,000 to the City of Monmouth, Illinois for 
        water infrastructure improvements;
          133. $200,000 to the Village of Lisbon, Illinois for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          134. $200,000 to the Town of Cortland, Illinois for 
        construction of an elevated water storage tower;
          135. $200,000 to the Village of Burlington, Illinois 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          136. $200,000 to the City of Genoa, Illinois for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          137. $250,000 for the Village of Oreana, Illinois for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          138. $300,000 to the City of Shelbyville, Illinois 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          139. $300,000 to the City of Breese, Illinois for 
        water infrastructure improvements;
          140. $325,000 to the Village of East Hazel Crest, 
        Illinois for water and wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements at the 171st Street Water Main 
        Interconnection and Pump Station;
          141. $325,000 to the Village of Downs, Illinois for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          142. $350,000 for the City of Delavan, Illinois for 
        the construction of new water service lines and storage 
        tanks;
          143. $350,000 for the City of Springfield, Illinois 
        for the replacement of the First Street Sanitary Sewer 
        and stormwater management for Memorial Medical Center;
          144. $350,000 to the Lake County Stormwater 
        Management Committee, Illinois for stormwater 
        detention, infrastructure, modeling, design and 
        management activities in the Upper Des Plaines River 
        watershed;
          145. $350,000 to the Village of Johnsburg, Illinois 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          146. $400,000 to the Village of LaGrange Park, 
        Illinois for a water main replacement project;
          147. $401,500 for the Village of Washington, Illinois 
        for improvements to the School Street Sewer 
        Interceptor;
          148. $500,000 for the City of Virginia, Illinois for 
        the construction of a water treatment facility;
          149. $500,000 for the City of Lincoln, Illinois for 
        upgrades for its wastewater treatment plant;
          150. $500,000 for the Village of Armington, Illinois 
        for the construction of a sanitary sewer project;
          151. $500,000 for the City of Forsyth, Illinois for 
        construction of a new water treatment plant;
          152. $500,000 to the Village of Port Barrington, 
        Illinois for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          153. $648,500 for the City of Peoria, Illinois for 
        the installation of sanitary sewer infrastructure in 
        Growth cells 2 and 3;
          154. $175,000 to the Village of Evansville, Indiana 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          155. $200,000 to the City of Martinsville, Indiana 
        for replacement of the city's water wells;
          156. $200,000 to the City of Jeffersonville, Indiana 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          157. $200,000 to the City of Richmond, Indiana for 
        wastewater and stormwater infrastructure improvements;
          158. $350,000 to the City of Evansville, Indiana for 
        the Pigeon Creek Enhancement Project;
          159. $400,000 to the City of Carmel, Indiana for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          160. $400,000 to the City of Fort Wayne, Indiana for 
        the Camp Scott Program for combined sewer overflow 
        infrastructure improvements;
          161. $400,000 to Rensselaer, Indiana for wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements;
          162. $600,000 to the City of Martinsville, Indiana 
        for replacement of the city's water storage tank;
          163. $250,000 to the City of Roeland Park, Kansas for 
        stormwater infrastructure improvements for Roeland 
        Park;
          164. $400,000 to the City of Hutchinson, Kansas for 
        the Hutchinson Water Remediation Water Supply Project;
          165. $450,000 to the City of Newton, Kansas for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          166. $200,000 to the City of Frankfort, Kentucky for 
        the Schenkel Lane Sewer Replacement project;
          167. $200,000 to Grant County, Kentucky for the Grant 
        County/Bullock Pen Waterline Extension project;
          168. $200,000 to the City of Wickliffe, Kentucky for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          169. $300,000 to the Boyle County Fiscal Court, 
        Kentucky for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          170. $325,000 to the Green River Valley Water 
        District, Kentucky for the Hatcher Valley Water 
        project;
          171. $350,000 to the City of Whitesburg, Kentucky for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          172. $480,000 to the City of Mt. Vernon, Kentucky for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          173. $800,000 to Martin County, Kentucky for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements and extension of 
        wastewater lines;
          174. $1,000,000 for the Louisville/Jefferson County 
        Metropolitan Sewer District, Kentucky to construct a 
        wet weather storage basin to control sewer overflows;
          175. $125,000 to Waterworks District No. 1, Vermilion 
        Parish, Louisiana for water infrastructure 
        improvements;
          176. $200,000 to the City of Denham Springs, 
        Louisiana for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          177. $300,000 to the Military Department of Louisiana 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements at the 
        Gillis W. Long Center in St. Gabriel, Louisiana;
          178. $400,000 to the City of New Orleans, Louisiana 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          179. $800,000 to the City of Shreveport, Louisiana 
        for the installation of backflow preventers within the 
        water distribution system;
          180. $800,000 to the South Central Planning and 
        Development Commission, Louisiana for water and 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          181. $200,000 to the Boston Groundwater Trust of 
        Massachusetts for its groundwater initiative;
          182. $200,000 to the City of Brockton, Massachusetts 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements at the 
        Brockton Wastewater Treatment Facility;
          183. $200,000 for wastewater infrastructure 
        improvement projects in Essex County, Massachusetts;
          184. $250,000 to the City of Lowell, Massachusetts 
        for combined sewer overflow infrastructure 
        improvements;
          185. $500,000 to the Cities of Fall River and New 
        Bedford, Massachusetts for the Bristol County Sewer 
        Infrastructure Improvement project;
          186. $500,000 to the Pioneer Valley Planning 
        Commission for sewage pollution control projects along 
        the Connecticut River in Massachusetts and Connecticut;
          187. $200,000 to the Town of Elkton, Maryland for 
        construction of biological nutrient removal facilities;
          188. $200,000 to the Anacostia Watershed Society in 
        Bladensburg, Maryland for installation and maintenance 
        of trash collection devices along the Anacostia River;
          189. $350,000 to the City of Cambridge, Maryland for 
        combined sewer overflow infrastructure improvements;
          190. $400,000 to the City of Crisfield, Maryland for 
        construction of biological nutrient removal facilities;
          191. $400,000 to the Washington Suburban Sanitary 
        Commission for wastewater disinfection system upgrades 
        for Montgomery and Prince George's Counties, Maryland;
          192. $300,000 to the Sanford Sewer District, Maine 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          193. $200,000 to the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe of 
        Michigan for the Saginaw Chippewa Water Main Extension 
        Project;
          194. $250,000 to the City of Bad Axe, Michigan for 
        construction of water treatment infrastructure for 
        North Central Huron County, Michigan;
          195. $250,000 to the Grand Traverse County Board of 
        Public Works, Water and Sewer Committee, Michigan for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          196. $300,000 to the City of Negaunee, Michigan for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          197. $325,000 to the Genesee County Drain Commission, 
        Michigan for the Northeast Relief Sewer/Kersley Creek 
        Interceptor project;
          198. $325,000 to Livingston County, Michigan for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements for the Tyrone 
        and Hartland Townships;
          199. $400,000 to the City of Detroit, Michigan for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements at the Belle 
        Isle Sewerage Pumping Station and Combined Sewer 
        Overflow Facility;
          200. $750,000 to the City of Grand Rapids, Michigan 
        for combined sewer overflow infrastructure 
        improvements;
          201. $1,000,000 to Wayne County, Michigan for 
        continuation of the Rouge River National Wet Weather 
        Demonstration Project;
          202. $1,375,000 for the Oakland County Drain 
        Commission to address sanitary sewer overflows in 
        Evergreen Farmington, Michigan;
          203. $300,000 to the City of Roseau, Minnesota for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          204. $750,000 to the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe for 
        construction of the Mille Lacs Regional Wastewater 
        Treatment Facility in Minnesota;
          205. $750,000 to the City of Minneapolis, Minnesota 
        for combined sewer overflow infrastructure 
        improvements;
          206. $175,000 to the City of Belton, Missouri for 
        stormwater and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          207. $300,000 to the City of Pacific, Missouri for 
        water infrastructure improvements for the Brush Creek 
        Sanitary Sewer District;
          208. $300,000 to the City of Lake St. Louis, Missouri 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements in the 
        Peruque Creek watershed;
          209. $350,000 to the City of Springfield, Missouri 
        for feasibility studies, preliminary and final designs 
        and for stormwater infrastructure improvements for the 
        Upper James River;
          210. $400,000 to Franklin County, Mississippi for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements for 
        the Okissa Lake Community development;
          211. $620,000 to the Town of Farmington, Mississippi 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          212. $110,000 to the Town of Erwin, North Carolina to 
        enhance its water and wastewater infrastructure through 
        the purchase of treatment facilities at the former 
        Swift Denim textile plant;
          213. $200,000 to the City of Shelby, North Carolina 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          214. $200,000 to the Neuse Regional Water and Sewer 
        Authority for water infrastructure improvements for 
        Lenoir County, North Carolina;
          215. $200,000 to the City of Creedmore, North 
        Carolina for water quality improvements for Lake 
        Rogers;
          216. $200,000 to the Town of Bryson City, North 
        Carolina for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          217. $250,000 to the Town of Hillsborough, North 
        Carolina for wastewater system maintenance and 
        upgrades;
          218. $250,000 to the City of Durham, North Carolina 
        for water security improvements;
          219. $250,000 to the City of Cherryville, North 
        Carolina for renovation of the Sunbeam Industrial Park 
        Water Tank and Water Line;
          220. $250,000 to Hoke County, North Carolina for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          221. $250,000 to the Town of Bolton, North Carolina 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          222. $250,000 to the Town of East Spencer, North 
        Carolina for water infrastructure improvements;
          223. $300,000 to the City of Belmont, North Carolina 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          224. $400,000 to the City of Marion, North Carolina 
        for water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          225. $750,000 to the Town of Holly Springs, North 
        Carolina for water and wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements according to the Master Water Reuse Plan;
          226. $300,000 to the City of Park River, North Dakota 
        for water infrastructure improvements;
          227. $400,000 to the City of South Sioux City, 
        Nebraska for the Bi-State Missouri River Sewer Crossing 
        project between Nebraska and Iowa;
          228. $600,000 to the City of Omaha, Nebraska for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          229. $300,000 to the City of Manchester, New 
        Hampshire for the West Bridge and Bremer Street Sewer 
        Separation project;
          230. $400,000 to the City of Nashua, New Hampshire 
        for its Combined Sewer Overflow project;
          231. $400,000 to the State of New Jersey, New Jersey 
        Meadowlands Commission for wetlands restoration;
          232. $500,000 to the Passaic Valley Sewerage 
        Commission in New Jersey for its combined sewage 
        overflow reduction program and the Passaic River/Newark 
        Bay Restoration program;
          233. $800,000 to the Township of Jefferson, New 
        Jersey for wastewater infrastructure improvements to 
        help protect water quality of Lake Hopatcong;
          234. $125,000 to the Dona Ana Mutual Domestic Water 
        Consumers Association for wastewater management and 
        treatment infrastructure improvements in northern Dona 
        Ana County, New Mexico;
          235. $250,000 to the City of Las Vegas, New Mexico 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          236. $300,000 to the City of Elephant Butte, New 
        Mexico for wastewater infrastructure improvements in 
        North Sierra County;
          237. $600,000 to Bernalillo County, New Mexico for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements for 
        South and North Valley;
          238. $175,000 to the City of Henderson, Nevada for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          239. $600,000 to the Virgin Valley Water District, 
        Nevada for an arsenic treatment facility;
          240. $113,000 to the Village of Pelham, New York for 
        sanitary sewer and storm water infrastructure 
        improvement project;
          241. $125,000 to the Town of Chester, New York for 
        water infrastructure improvements;
          242. $200,000 to the Town of Sennett, New York for 
        water infrastructure improvements;
          243. $200,000 to the Town of Bethel, New York for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          244. $200,000 to the Village of Endicott, New York 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          245. $200,000 to the Town of Babylon, New York for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          246. $250,000 to the Town of Grand Isle, New York for 
        wastewater and combined sewer overflow infrastructure 
        improvements;
          247. $300,000 to the Town of Oyster Bay, New York for 
        the Oyster Bay-Cold Spring Harbor Complex Storm Water 
        Drainage Catch Basin Inserts Project;
          248. $325,000 to Fulton County, New York for water 
        and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          249. $400,000 for the Town of North Hempstead, New 
        York for stormwater management infrastructure 
        improvements;
          250. $400,000 to the County of Rockland, New York for 
        the Western Ramapo Sewer Extension and Water Reuse 
        project;
          251. $400,000 to the City of Dunkirk, New York for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          252. $400,000 to the City of Hamburg, New York for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          253. $400,000 to the Town of Greece, New York for 
        sanitary sewer overflow infrastructure improvements;
          254. $400,000 to the Saratoga Water Committee in 
        Saratoga County, New York for construction of a 
        drinking water transport pipeline;
          255. $400,000 to the Village of Lake Placid, New York 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          256. $600,000 to the Wayne County Water and Sewer 
        Authority for construction of a waterline in the Towns 
        of Sodus and Huron, New York;
          257. $3,000,000 to the City of Syracuse, New York for 
        Westcott Reservoir for drinking water infrastructure 
        improvements;
          258. $5,000,000 for drinking water infrastructure 
        needs in the New York City Watershed;
          259. $5,000,000 for water quality infrastructure 
        improvements for Long Island Sound, New York;
          260. $12,300,000 for continued clean water 
        improvements for Onondaga Lake, New York;
          261. $200,000 to Trumbell County, Ohio for 
        construction of the Little Squaw Creek 
        InterceptorBelmont Avenue;
          262. $250,000 to the City of Rocky River, Ohio for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          263. $250,000 to Mahoning County, Ohio for wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements for Springfield Township;
          264. $300,000 to the City of Akron, Ohio for the Rack 
        No. 40 Combined Sewer Overflow program;
          265. $300,000 to the Village of Haskins, Ohio for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          266. $350,000 to the Village of New Riegel, Ohio for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          267. $350,000 to the City of Galion, Ohio for the 
        Galion Bio-Solids Handling Replacement Project;
          268. $400,000 to the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer 
        District for the Doan Brook Pollution Abatement 
        Project;
          269. $450,000 to the City of Ashland, Ohio for water 
        infrastructure improvements;
          270. $500,000 for the Village of Somerset, Perry 
        County, Ohio to rehabilitate its existing water 
        treatment plant;
          271. $500,000 to the City of Kirtland, Ohio for water 
        and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          272. $600,000 to the City of Vermilion, Ohio for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements and sanitary 
        sewer rehabilitations;
          273. $750,000 to Guernsey County, Ohio for a water 
        line extension project in Eastern Guernsey County;
          274. $800,000 for Springfield, Ohio for the 
        establishment of water and sewer infrastructure in 
        preparation for and economic development project;
          275. $800,000 to the Metropolitan Sewer District of 
        Greater Cincinnati, Ohio for sanitary sewer overflow 
        infrastructure improvements;
          276. $850,000 to the City of Delphos, Ohio for water 
        infrastructure improvements;
          277. $900,000 to the City of Urbana, Ohio for 
        construction of a new well field;
          278. $1,000,000 to the City of Toledo, Ohio for wet 
        weather flow and wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements;
          279. $1,200,000 to the City of Amherst, Ohio for 
        wastewater treatment plant improvements;
          280. $1,200,000 to the City of Port Clinton, Ohio for 
        wastewater treatment plant improvements;
          281. $2,000,000 for Shawnee Hills subdivision of 
        Greene County, Ohio for a central sewer system;
          282. $200,000 to the City of Sallisaw, Oklahoma for 
        water infrastructure improvements in Sequoyah County;
          283. $200,000 to the City of Midwest City, Oklahoma 
        for water infrastructure improvements;
          284. $200,000 to the City of Norman, Oklahoma for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          285. $200,000 to the City of Seminole, Oklahoma for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          286. $325,000 to the Town of Arcadia, Oklahoma for 
        water supply and wastewater handling systems upgrades;
          287. $325,000 to the City of Choctaw, Oklahoma for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          288. $200,000 to the City of Sweet Home, Oregon for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          289. $200,000 to Tillamook County, Oregon for 
        construction of a dairy manure composting facility;
          290. $200,000 to the City of Warrenton, Oregon for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          291. $250,000 to the Odell Sanitary District, Oregon 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          292. $400,000 to the City of Portland, Oregon for a 
        wet weather demonstration program;
          293. $125,000 to Paint Borough, Pennsylvania for 
        stormwater and sanitary sewer infrastructure 
        improvements;
          294. $200,000 to Cheltenham Township, Pennsylvania 
        for water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          295. $200,000 to Downingtown Borough, Pennsylvania 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          296. $200,000 to Lycoming County, Pennsylvania for 
        water infrastructure improvements for the Jersey Shore 
        Borough;
          297. $200,000 to the Borough of Avondale, 
        Pennsylvania for wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements;
          298. $200,000 to Springettsbury Township, 
        Pennsylvania for a Biosolids Treatment Facility 
        Replacement project;
          299. $200,000 to the Matamoras Municipal Authority of 
        the Borough of Matamoras, Pike County, Pennsylvania for 
        water infrastructure improvements;
          300. $250,000 to the Somerset County Redevelopment 
        Authority, Pennsylvania for water and wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements for development of the 
        Windber Business Park;
          301. $300,000 for Big Beaver Borough, Pennsylvania 
        for extension of water and wastewater lines;
          302. $300,000 to the City of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 
        for the Mish Run Sewer Improvement Project;
          303. $300,000 to the Hanover Township Sewage 
        Authority, Pennsylvania for extension of sewer lines 
        for Starpoint Business and Industrial Park;
          304. $325,000 to the City of Lancaster, Pennsylvania 
        for water infrastructure improvements;
          305. $400,000 to the City of Philadelphia, 
        Philadelphia Water Department for the planning, design, 
        and construction of stormwater management solutions;
          306. $400,000 for the Wyoming Valley Sanitation 
        Authority, Pennsylvania for combined sewer overflow 
        infrastructure improvements;
          307. $400,000 to the Kulpmont-Marion Heights Joint 
        Municipal Authority, Northumberland County, 
        Pennsylvania for wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements;
          308. $600,000 to the Borough of Coudersport, 
        Pennsylvania for water and wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements;
          309. $750,000 to the City of Sharon, Pennsylvania for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          310. $1,200,000 to the Allegheny County Sanitation 
        District, Pennsylvania for the Three Rivers Wet Weather 
        Demonstration Program;
          311. $1,650,000 to the Municipality of Barceloneta, 
        Puerto Rico for water infrastructure improvements in 
        the Palenque and Garrochales communities;
          312. $175,000 to the Town of Lincoln, Rhode Island 
        for water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          313. $175,000 to the Town of North Providence, Rhode 
        Island for wastewater and stormwater infrastructure 
        improvements;
          314. $250,000 to the Narragansett Bay Commission of 
        Rhode Island for combined sewer overflow control and 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          315. $175,000 to the City of Greenville, South 
        Carolina for water and wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements;
          316. $200,000 to the Abbeville County Development 
        Board, South Carolina for water and wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements;
          317. $250,000 to the Town of Estill, South Carolina 
        for water infrastructure improvements;
          318. $300,000 to Calhoun County, South Carolina for 
        water infrastructure improvements for the Fort Motte 
        Water System;
          319. $300,000 to the Alligator Rural Water Company 
        for water infrastructure improvements in Chesterfield 
        County, South Carolina;
          320. $400,000 to Charleston Public Works, South 
        Carolina for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          321. $400,000 to the Myrtle Beach Downtown 
        Redevelopment Corporation, South Carolina for 
        stormwater infrastructure improvements according to the 
        Pavilion Area Master Plan;
          322. $125,000 to Franklin, Tennessee for water and 
        stormwater infrastructure improvements in the Watson 
        Branch Watershed;
          323. $200,000 to Meigs County, Tennessee for 
        extension of water lines;
          324. $200,000 to the City of Decatur, Tennessee for 
        water infrastructure improvements;
          325. $250,000 to the City of Jackson, Tennessee for 
        stormwater and sanitary sewer overflow infrastructure 
        improvements along Sandy Creek;
          326. $300,000 to the City of Tesculum, Tennessee for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          327. $200,000 to the City of Taylor, Texas for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          328. $200,000 to Harris County, Texas Precinct 2 for 
        water quality planning and design to provide water and 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          329. $200,000 to the El Paso Water Utilities, Texas 
        for water infrastructure improvements;
          330. $200,000 to the City of Austin, Texas for 
        sanitary sewer infrastructure improvements;
          331. $325,000 to the San Antonio, Texas Water System 
        for water infrastructure security improvements;
          332. $350,000 to the City of Leonard, Texas for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          333. $400,000 to the Texas Water Development Board in 
        Freeport Texas for the Texas Water Desalination 
        Initiative;
          334. $400,000 to the City of Waco, Texas for the 
        Waco-McLennan County Regional Water project;
          335. $500,000 to the Brazos River Authority for water 
        infrastructure improvements in West Fort Bend County, 
        Texas;
          336. $175,000 to Sandy City, Utah for drinking water 
        and storm water infrastructure improvements;
          337. $400,000 to Park City, Utah for water 
        infrastructure improvements associated with the Spiro 
        and Judge Water Tunnels;
          338. $125,000 for the Phoebe Needles System in 
        Franklin County Virginia for a secondary sewage 
        treatment system;
          339. $150,000 to the Town of Chatham, Virginia for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          340. $200,000 to Westmoreland County, Virginia for 
        the Washington District Sewer Project;
          341. $250,000 for the Prentis Park Water and Sewer 
        Rehabilitation project in Portsmouth, Virginia;
          342. $300,000 to the County of Accomack, Virginia for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          343. $400,000 to Chesterfield County, Virginia for 
        drainage and wastewater infrastructure improvements for 
        Rayon Park;
          344. $400,000 to be devided equally between the City 
        of Alexandria, Virginia and Arlington County, Virginia 
        for water quality improvements in the Four Mile Run 
        watershed;
          345. $440,000 for Henry County and the City of 
        Martinsville, Virginia for a wastewater treatment plant 
        upgrade and the conversion of two wastewater plants to 
        pumping stations;
          346. $500,000 for the Piney River Wastewater 
        Improvement Project in Nelson County, Virginia;
          347. $500,000 for Fluvanna County, Virginia for water 
        and sewer projects;
          348. $500,000 for the Town of Kenbridge, Virginia for 
        the expansion of a wastewater treatment plant;
          349. $785,000 for Franklin County, Virginia for a 
        drinking water infrastructure project;
          350. $800,000 to the City of Richmond, Virginia for 
        combined sewer overflow infrastructure improvements;
          351. $1,000,000 for Appomattox County and the Town of 
        Appomattox, Virginia for water and sewer projects;
          352. $1,200,000 to Dale Service Corporation 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements in Dale City, 
        Virginia;
          353. $350,000 to the Government of the Virgin Islands 
        for wastewater treatment infrastructure improvements;
          354. $175,000 to King County, Washington for an 
        Infiltration/Inflow project;
          355. $200,000 to the City of Tacoma, Washington for 
        water and stormwater infrastructure improvements for 
        the Salishan housing development;
          356. $200,000 to the City of Grand Coulee, Washington 
        for water infrastructure improvements;
          357. $200,000 for the Public Utility District of 
        Skagit County, Washington for wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements for Similk Beach on Fidalgo Island;
          358. $200,000 to the City of Seattle, Washington for 
        the High Point Natural Drainage System project;
          359. $250,000 to the City of Lakewood, Washington for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          360. $400,000 to the City of Carnation, Washington 
        for wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          361. $400,000 to the City of Duvall, Washington for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          362. $600,000 to the City of Shelton, Washington for 
        water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          363. $200,000 to the Village of Fairchild, Wisconsin 
        for water and sewer infrastructure improvements;
          364. $300,000 to the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage 
        District, Wisconsin for its Central Metropolitan 
        Interceptor System project;
          365. $325,000 to the City of Marinette, Wisconsin for 
        wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          366. $400,000 to the City of Racine Water Utility, 
        Wisconsin for water infrastructure improvements;
          367. $1,800,000 to the City of Chipewa Falls, 
        Wisconsin for sewer and water infrastrructure 
        enhancements;
          368. $2,150,000 to the Village of Port Edwards, 
        Wisconsin for replacement of a sewage treatment plant;
          369. $380,000 to the City of Moundsville Sanitary 
        Department in West Virginia for storm sewer and 
        sanitary improvements on Jefferson Avenue;
          370. $671,000 to the City of Petersburg, West 
        Virginia for water and wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements;
          371. $750,000 to the Town of Harrisville, West 
        Virginia for water and wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements;
          372. $824,000 to the City of Philippi, West Virginia 
        for water and wastewater infrastructure improvements;
          373. $875,000 to the Marshall County Sewerage 
        District in West Virginia for water and wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements;
          374. $1,617,000 to the Gilmer County Public Service 
        District in West Virginia for water and wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements;
          375. $2,000,000 to the Sun Valley Public Service 
        District in West Virginia for water and wastewater 
        infrastructure improvements;
          376. $5,000,000 to the City of Parkersburg, West 
        Virginia for water and wastewater infrastructure 
        improvements.

                        ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

    The Committee has again this year included an 
administrative provision giving the Administrator specific 
authority to, in the absence of an acceptable tribal program, 
award cooperative agreements to federally recognized Indian 
Tribes or Intertribal consortia so as to properly carry out 
EPA's environmental programs.
    In order to continue providing sufficient and necessary 
resources for EPA's pesticide re-registration program, the 
Committee has included bill language which authorizes for one 
year the collection by EPA of $21,500,000 in maintenance fees. 
This provision extends to September 30, 2004 the date upon 
which such authority for collections expires. The Committee 
expects that, in the absence of a new tolerance fee, funds 
requested in the budget submission to support FTEs in the re-
registration program may be used to support tolerance 
reassessment activities. Bill language is also once again 
included prohibiting the use of funds to promulgate a final 
regulation to implement changes in the payment of pesticide 
tolerance processing fees as proposed at 64 Federal Register 
31040, or any similar proposal; and prohibiting the collection 
of pesticide registration fees if a new maintenance fee has 
gone into effect.
    The Committee is aware that stakeholders affected by this 
complex issue are working to finalize a comprehensive 
legislative proposal on pesticide fees. The Committee 
encourages all parties involved to continue to work together on 
this important issue. The Committee looks forward to working 
with the authorizing committees so that long-awaited revisions 
in the program's fee structure can be considering during this 
session of the 108th Congress.

                   Executive Office of the President


                OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................        $7,027,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................         5,333,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................         7,027,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        +1,694,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............                 0


    The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) was 
created by the National Science and Technology Policy, 
Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976. OSTP advises the 
President and other agencies within the Executive Office on 
science and technology policies and coordinates research and 
development programs for the Federal Government.
    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $7,027,000 for 
fiscal year 2004, an increase of $1,694,000 above the fiscal 
year 2003 appropriation and the same level as the budget 
request.
    The Committee is concerned that reports from various 
Agencies have not been submitted to the Committee in a timely 
fashion because they have been delayed by reviews by multiple 
layers of the Administration, including OSTP. The Committee 
strongly urges OSTP to work with its constituency agencies to 
expedite reports required by the Committee.

  COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................        $3,238,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................         3,011,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................         3,238,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +227,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) was established 
by Congress under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(NEPA). The Office of Environmental Quality (OEQ), which 
provides professional and administrative staff for the Council, 
was established in the Environmental Quality Improvement Act of 
1970. The Council on Environmental Policy has statutory 
responsibility under NEPA for environmental oversight of all 
Federal agencies and is to lead interagency decision-making of 
all environmental matters.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee has recommended the 
budget request of $3,238,000 for the CEQ and OEQ, an increase 
of $227,000 above last year's spending level. The Committee 
directs that CEQ's total staffing level not exceed 24 FTEs at 
any time during the fiscal year.
    As in previous years, bill language is included which 
stipulates that, notwithstanding the National Environmental 
Policy Act, the CEQ can operate with one council member and 
that member shall be considered the chairman for purposes of 
conducting the business of the CEQ and OEQ.

                 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation


                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $30,125,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        30,848,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        30,125,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          -723,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    Funding for the Office of the Inspector General at the 
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is provided pursuant to 
31 U.S.C. 1105(a)(25), which requires a separate appropriation 
account for appropriations for each Office of Inspector General 
of an establishment defined under section 11(2) of the 
Inspector General Act of 1978.
    The Committee recommendation, the same as the budget 
request, provides for the transfer of $30,125,000 from the Bank 
Insurance Fund, the Savings Association Insurance Fund, and the 
FSLIC Resolution Fund to finance the Office of Inspector 
General for fiscal year 2004.

                    General Services Administration


                FEDERAL CITIZEN INFORMATION CENTER FUND




Fiscal year 2003 recommendation.......................       $12,500,000
Fiscal year 2002 appropriation........................        11,466,000
Fiscal year 2003 budget request.......................       17,6431,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2002 appropriation........        +1,134,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 request..............        -5,043,000


    The Consumer Information Center (CIC) was established 
within the General Services Administration (GSA) by Executive 
Order on October 26, 1970, to help Federal departments and 
agencies promote and distribute consumer information collected 
as a byproduct of the Government's program activities.
    The Federal Information Center (FIC) program was 
established within the General Services Administration in 1966, 
and was formalized by Public Law 95-491 in 1980. The program's 
purpose is to provide the public with direct information about 
all aspects of Federal programs, regulations, and services. To 
accomplish this mission, contractual services are used to 
respond to public inquiries via a nationwide toll-free 
telephone call center.
    In 2000, the Consumer Information Center assumed 
responsibility for the operations of the FIC program with the 
resulting organization being officially named the Federal 
Consumer Information Center. The Federal Consumer Information 
Center combines the nationwide toll-free telephone assistance 
program and the database of the FIC with the CIC website and 
publications distribution programs.
    During fiscal year 2002, the Federal Consumer Information 
Center became part of GSA's newly established Office of Citizen 
Services and Communications and was renamed the Federal Citizen 
Information Center (FCIC). The new Office serves as a central 
federal gateway for citizens, businesses, other governments, 
and the media to obtain information and services from the 
government. FCIC assumed operational control of the 
FirstGov.gov website in fiscal year 2002.
    Public Law 98-63, enacted July 30, 1983, established a 
revolving fund for the CIC. Under this fund, FCIC activities 
are financed from the following: annual appropriations from the 
general funds of the Treasury, reimbursements from agencies for 
distribution of publications, user fees collected from the 
public, and any other income incident to FCIC activities. All 
are available as authorized in appropriation acts without 
regard to fiscal year limitations. The bill includes a 
limitation of $18,000,000 on the availability of the revolving 
fund. Any revenues accruing to this fund during fiscal year 
2004 in excess of this amount shall remain in the fund and are 
not available for expenditure except as authorized in 
appropriation Acts.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee recommends $12,500,000, 
an increase of $1,134,000 over the level for fiscal year 2003 
and a decrease of $5,043,000 from the budget request.
    The appropriation will be augmented by reimbursements from 
Federal agencies for distribution of consumer publications, 
user fees from the public, and other income.

         INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON THE HOMELESS OPERATING EXPENSES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................        $1,500,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................         1,490,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................             \1\ 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........           +10,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......     \1\ 1,500,000


\1\ The budget proposed funding for this activity within the Department
  of Housing and Urban Development, Homeless Assistance Grants account
  under title II.

    The Committee recommends $1,500,000 for operating expenses 
of the Interagency Council on the Homeless, the same amount 
requested in the budget under the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development.
    Proposed authorization language is not included to allow 
the Council to receive support from other agencies on a non-
reimbursable basis and to change the name of the Council.

             National Aeronautics and Space Administration





Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................   $15,540,300,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................    15,338,907,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................    15,469,300,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........      +201,393,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............       +71,000,000


    The National Aeronautics and Space Administration was 
created by the National Space Act of 1958. NASA conducts space 
and aeronautics research, development, and flight activity 
designed to ensure and maintain U.S. preeminence in space and 
aeronautical endeavors.
    The Committee has recommended a total program level of 
$15,540,300,000 in fiscal year 2004, which is an increase of 
$71,000,000 from the budget request and an increase of 
$201,393,000 when compared to the fiscal year 2003 enacted 
appropriation.
    NASA's Full Cost initiative is expected to introduce new 
cost accounting, budgeting and management practices into NASA. 
The NASA full cost concept and approach is intended to 
integrate full-cost accounting budgeting, and management 
practices to enhance cost-effective mission performance by 
providing complete cost information for improved (more fully 
informed) decision making and management. The initiative 
introduces a concept that ties all NASA costs (including civil 
service personnel costs) to major activities (programs and 
projects) and budgets, accounts, reports, and manage programs 
and projects from a full-cost perspective.
    While the title ``Full Cost'' implies financial matters, 
the Committee understands that NASA's approach to 
implementation includes broad and significant management 
implications. Full costing should also support full disclosure 
and reporting on programs and projects with an improved 
matching of costs with related program and project performance. 
In that regard, the Committee believes that full costing is 
consistent with sound business practices and with recent 
legislative and administrative guidance, including the CFOs Act 
of 1990, Government Performance and Results Act, and the 
National Performance Review (NPR). Accordingly, the Committee 
expects NASA to implement full cost accounting in fiscal year 
2004 within the account structure as set forth in its fiscal 
year 2004 budget request. In the event of a continuing 
resolution prior to enactment of a permanent fiscal year 2004 
appropriation, the Committee expects that NASA will implement 
any such continuing resolutions in full cost under the account 
structure presented in the fiscal year 2004 budget request.
    The Committee is concerned that the NASA Inspector General 
continues to find weaknesses in cyber-security management 
within the NASA organization. To address this weakness, the 
Committee believes NASA can use vulnerability management as a 
means of securing critical computer networks. The Committee is 
aware of a new appliance-based technology that runs a hardened 
operating system and communicates through encryption using 
digital certificates for authentication. The technology will 
allow for greater certainty in identifying business risk, and 
eliminating those risks. The Committee directs NASA to provide 
no less than $2,000,000 within available funds to demonstrate 
this technology as part of its cyber-security architecture.
    The Committee directs NASA to reevaluate all its 
international cooperative efforts and hopes NASA looks to 
cultivate better relations with the United Kingdom, Italy, 
Australia, Poland and Spain on projects in the future.

                       SPACE FLIGHT CAPABILITIES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $7,806,100,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     7,908,500,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     7,782,100,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........      -102,400,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............       +24,000,000


    This appropriation provides for the conduct and support of 
space flight capabilities, including research, development, 
support and services. Within this appropriation, two major 
subcategories of funding exist, space flight and aerospace 
technology. Funding in the space flight category is provided 
for continued development and operation of the International 
Space Station, operations and upgrades to the performance and 
safety of the space shuttle, and flight support operations. 
Funding in the aerospace technology category includes the space 
launch initiative, mission and science measurement technology, 
and innovative technology transfer partnerships.
    The Committee recommends a total of $7,806,100,000 for the 
space flight capabilities account in fiscal year 2004, an 
increase of $24,000,000 to the budget request and a reduction 
of $102,400,000 from the fiscal year 2003 level as estimated in 
this new account structure.
    The Committee has taken no action at this time with regard 
to the International Space Station, the Space Shuttle program, 
the Orbital Space Plane program, or the Next Generation Launch 
Technology program. All of these programs will undoubtedly 
undergo significant transformation in the coming weeks as the 
results of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board's work is 
published and discussed. The Committee will use the report of 
the Board, and NASA's proposed response to the Board's findings 
and recommendations, as the basis for final action on the 
fiscal year 2004 budget proposal. The Committee has taken this 
position at this time because it expects the Board's 
recommendations to be far- reaching and significant. The 
Committee expects NASA to provide its plan of action for 
implementing the Board's recommendations to the Congress as 
soon as possible, with at least preliminary budget implications 
formally submitted to the Committee no later than September 15, 
2003.
    The Committee remains committed to the full scientific 
utilization of the International Space Station (ISS), which 
will require a robust and expeditious means by which station 
crew can return safely to Earth in the case of an emergency. 
The Committee recognizes that NASA is in the process of using 
independent review teams to evaluate the costs and benefits of 
developing a reusable or expendable Orbital Space Plane (OSP) 
crewed system, which will return crew from, and soon thereafter 
transport crew to, the ISS. The Committee emphasizes its intent 
that full scientific utilization of the ISS begin as soon as 
possible, and therefore an American crew return and transport 
capability should be developed as expeditiously as possible.
    Therefore, NASA is directed to provide to the Committee 
within ninety days of enactment of this act a report on the 
costs and benefits of both reusable and expendable 
architectures for the OSP crewed system, including the 
implications of each architecture type on the development 
timeline for a system that meets NASA's OSP Level I 
requirements. In addition, NASA is directed to notify the 
Committee before it takes any action that would preclude the 
OSP crewed system from eventually being integrated with a 
reusable launch booster.
    In the past, this Committee and the Congress have been 
staunch supporters of NASA's efforts to upgrade its shuttle 
fleet in the areas of safety and reliability and has provided 
all amounts requested for upgrades only to see significant 
upgrades canceled or deferred due to technological obstacles or 
cost constraints. The Committee therefore is pleased that NASA 
has initiated a new process that will integrate safety, 
supportability, obsolescence, infrastructure, and ground 
systems associated with the shuttle. The Committee expects that 
this overall process will result in long range plans for the 
shuttle, a prioritized list of investments, and a formal 
selection process for those investments that will achieve the 
goal of safe and efficient shuttle operations.
    The Committee has provided an increase of $24,000,000 to 
this appropriation for the express purpose of continuing the 
commercial programs within the Innovative Technology Transfer 
Partnerships theme. The Committee does not agree with the 
termination of this program as proposed in the budget 
submission and directs NASA to keep the program in place as it 
existed in fiscal year 2003 and prior fiscal years.

                  SCIENCE, AERONAUTICS AND EXPLORATION

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $7,707,900,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     7,404,900,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     7,660,900,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........      +303,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............       +47,000,000


    This appropriation provides for the research and 
development activities, and all associated costs of the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. These activities 
include: space science, earth science, biological and physical 
research, aeronautics, and education programs.
    The Committee recommends $7,707,900,000 for Science, 
Aeronautics and Exploration in fiscal year 2004. The amount 
recommended is an increase of $47,000,000 to the budget 
request, and an increase of $303,000,000 to the fiscal year 
2003 level as estimated in this new account structure.
    The Committee is aware of a concern in the graduate 
education community that the current level of stipends in 
NASA's Graduate Student Research Program and the Earth System 
Science Fellowship are lagging the level in other areas of the 
Federal government and that participation in the programs by 
the best and brightest is therefore jeopardized. The Committee 
believes that NASA's investment in graduate education tries to 
fill a crucial funding gap in much the same way that NASA 
support for basic and applied research fills a gap in those 
programs. When the NASA investment in graduate education via 
stipends is increased, the rewards to NASA will increase. The 
Committee directs NASA to evaluate the stipend level in its 
programs and report to the Committee on actions it will take to 
increase the level of stipend for its programs. Additionally, 
the Committee directs NASA to evaluate and report on the value 
of expanding its use of graduate fellowships to all NASA 
science offices.
          1. An increase of $1,000,000 for the GSFC ``COM 
        Simulation Architecture Project'';
          2. An increase of $1,000,000 for the Alabama 
        Supercomputer Education Outreach program;
          3. An increase of $1,000,000 for the Pulsed Power and 
        Energetic Research Center at the University of 
        Huntsville, Alabama;
          4. An increase of $1,000,000 for Science, 
        Engineering, Math and Aerospace Academy programs. The 
        Academy is to be established at Albany State College in 
        Georgia;
          5. An increase of $250,000 for the National Science 
        Center Foundation of Augusta, Georgia for its Learning 
        Logic Program;
          6. An increase of $1,000,000 for aircraft engine 
        research, including research being done in conjunction 
        with the Department of Defense;
          7. An increase of $150,000 for the North Alabama 
        Planetarium Initiative;
          8. An increase of $250,000 to establish the 
        University of Alabama at Huntsville Center for 
        Modeling, Simulation and Analysis;
          9. An increase of $900,000 to Alabama A&M; 
        University--Advanced Space Propulsion Material Research 
        and Technology Center;
          10. An increase of $1,500,000 to the BizTech High 
        Tech Business Incubator;
          11. An increase of $3,000,000 to the In-Space 
        Propulsion program for High-Power Pulsed Inductive 
        Thruster technology research, utilizing a vector 
        inversion pulsed generator to pre-ionize the propellant 
        at an exceptionally high frequency;
          12. An increase of $1,000,000 for remote sensing 
        infrastructure at the University of Miami Center for 
        Southeastern Tropical Remote Sensing (CSTARS) in Miami-
        Dade County, Florida;
          13. An increase of $500,000 for Southeast Missouri 
        State University's NASA Educator Resource Center;
          14. An increase of $2,200,000 for the Education 
        Advancement Alliance in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for 
        education grants and scholarships;
          15. An increase of $250,000 for Rutgers for continued 
        construction of a research and teaching facility on its 
        Busch Campus in Piscataway, New Jersey;
          16. An increase of $250,000 for Middle Tennessee 
        State University for K-12 Science Education 
        Enhancements;
          17. An increase of $500,000 for the Northwestern 
        University's Institute for Proteomics and 
        Nanotechnology;
          18. An increase of 2,300,000 for the NASA--Illinois 
        Technology Commercialization Center at DuPage County 
        Research Park;
          19. An increase of $300,000 to develop a high 
        temperature nanotechnology research program;
          20. An increase of $300,000 for a national 
        Communications, Navigation, and Surveillance test bed;
          21. An increase of $300,000 for the Biological and 
        Physical Research Rack on the ISS;
          22. An increase of $500,000 for the Industrial 
        Technology Institute at Cleveland State University;
          23. An increase of $800,000 for an Aerospace 
        Education Center in Cleveland, Ohio;
          24. An increase of $800,000 for the Glennan 
        Microsystems Initiative;
          25. An increase of $500,000 for the Bowling Green 
        State University Hybrid Engine project;
          26. An increase of $500,000 for the Ohio View 
        Consortium;
          27. An increase of $1,000,000 for the University of 
        Toledo Turbine Institute
          28. An increase of $1,000,000 for the Garrett Morgan 
        Commercialization Initiative in Ohio;
          29. An increase of $200,000 for the Adler Planetarium 
        in Chicago, Illinois for its Cosmic Gateway Teacher 
        Training program;
          30. An increase of $1,000,000 for Michigan SATS 
        Incorporated;
          31. An increase of $2,000,000 for the Michigan 
        Technology Commercialization Corporation to identify 
        and develop new medical materials and technologies 
        which have the ability to provide low cost alternatives 
        to current therapies;
          32. An increase of $300,000 for the Center for 
        Science and Mathematics at the University of Redlands, 
        California;
          33. An increase of $3,000,000 for continued Space 
        Radiation Research at Loma Linda University Medical 
        Center;
          34. An increase of $300,000 for Fulton Montgomery 
        Community College in Johnstown, New York for the 
        Spatial Information Technology Center;
          35. An increase of $1,000,000 for the Goddard Space 
        Flight Center's Clustering and Advanced Visual 
        Environments Initiative;
          36. An increase of $1,500,000 for on-going activities 
        in support of NASA Dryden Flight Research Center's 
        Intelligent Flight Control System (IFCS) research 
        project;
          37. An increase of $1,500,000 for on-going activities 
        of the Goddard Institute for Systems, Software, and 
        Technology Research, including mission design tools, 
        Earth science analysis, and remote sensing 
        instrumentation development;
          38. An increase of $2,500,000 for the Institute for 
        Scientific Research, Inc. for research related to 
        transversable access to orbit;
          39. An increase of $3,000,000 for continued 
        development of a lightweight carrier pallet to support 
        the Hubble Space Telescope Program;
          40. An increase of $4,000,000 for NASA's Independent 
        Verification and Validation Facility;
          41. An increase of $15,500,000 for the Institute for 
        Scientific Research, Inc. for development and 
        construction of research facilities;
          42. An increase of $750,000 for the NASA Goddard 
        Commercial Technology program only to fund the full 
        implementation of the Earth Alert Project;
          43. An increase of $500,000 for the NASA Specialized 
        Center for Research and Training in Gravitational 
        Biology at North Carolina State University;
          44. An increase of $1,000,000 to the University of 
        North Carolina at Chapel Hill for the Morehead 
        Planetarium and Science Center;
          45. An increase of $1,500,000 to the MCNC-Research 
        and Development Institute (RDI) to establish a 
        Laboratory for Distributed Chemical and Biological 
        Sensors;
          46. An increase of $500,000 for the Montana Aerospace 
        Development Authority;
          47. An increase of $1,500,000 for Idaho State 
        University for the Temporal Land Cover Change Research 
        Program;
          48. An increase of $1,500,000 for the Idaho National 
        Engineering and Environmental Laboratory for 
        development of performance, safety, and mission success 
        tools for NASA programs;
          49. An increase of $500,000 for continuation of 
        emerging research that applies remote sensing 
        technologies to forest management practices at the 
        State University of New York, College of Environmental 
        Sciences and Forestry;
          50. An increase of $500,000 for the development of an 
        Aircraft Radio Guidance System (ARGUS) utilizing a new 
        radio frequency interferometer that will provide two or 
        three dimensional navigation guidance for airborne, 
        space or surface vehicles;
          51. An increase of $1,000,000 for the Advanced 
        Interactive Discovery Environment engineering research 
        program at Syracuse University;
          52. An increase of $1,500,000 for Integrated Sensing 
        Systems at the Rochester Institute of Technology;
          53. An increase of $2,000,000 to research Secure 
        Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) 
        Surveillance data link technology for enhanced aviation 
        security and general aviation airspace access;
          54. An increase of $2,000,000 for Cryogenic Power 
        Electronics Development at the State University of New 
        York at Albany;
          55. An increase of $2,500,000 for the JASON 
        Foundation;
          56. An increase of $2,500,000 for the Regional 
        Application Center for the Northeast;
          57. An increase of $2,550,000 for the Fractional 
        Ownership Test Program;
          58. An increase of $3,000,000 in the Computing, 
        Information and Communications Technology Program 
        (CICT) for High Information Density Approaches to 
        Mobile Broadband Internet Communications;
          59. An increase of $4,000,000 for new Adaptive 
        Surveillance Techniques for Airport Surface Safety;
          60. An increase of $4,500,000 for the National Center 
        of Excellence in Infotonics in Rochester, New York;
          61. An increase of $4,500,000 for the National Center 
        of Excellence in Bioinformatics in Buffalo, New York;
          62. An increase of $4,500,000 for a new Science 
        Center at St. Bonaventure University in New York State;
          63. An increase of $5,000,000 for Project SOCRATES;
          64. An increase of $6,000,000 for the continuation of 
        the Space Alliance Technology Outreach Program, 
        including $2,500,000 for business incubators in Florida 
        and New York;
          65. An increase of $175,000 to the Astronaut Memorial 
        Foundation for the Columbia STS 107 addition to the 
        National Space Mirror Memorial at Kennedy Space Center;
          66. An increase of $900,000 for the Florida Institute 
        for Technology in Melbourne, Florida for a Hydrogen 
        Production, Fuel Cell and Sensor Technology Initiative;
          67. An increase of $1,900,000 for replacement and 
        upgrade of equipment at Kennedy Space Center;
          68. An increase of $300,000 for the Florida State 
        University Challenger Learning Center;
          69. An increase of $500,000 to the University of 
        South Florida Center for Space Cellular and 
        Macromolecular Biotechnology;
          70. An increase of $8,000,000 for the Florida State 
        University System Hydrogen Research Initiative;
          71. An increase of $1,000,000 to the Little River 
        Canyon field school;
          72. An increase of $1,000,000 to the Tulane Institue 
        for Macromolecular Engineering and Science for research 
        on polymers;
          73. An increase of $7,500,000 for the implementation 
        of a remote data store at the NASA IV&V; Facility, to be 
        distributed as follows: no less than fifty percent of 
        appropriated funds are for the acquisition of data 
        storage hardware and software including, but not 
        limited to, content addressable storage technologies; 
        remaining funds are provided for communications, 
        facility and integration services at the IV&V; Facility 
        to support data backup, recovery, and on-line access 
        capabilities for the Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) 
        ECS program;
          74. A decrease of $20,000,000 to the James Webb Space 
        Telescope;
          75. A decrease of $13,000,000 to the Earth Science 
        Applications program;
          76. A decrease of $55,000,000 to the New Frontiers 
        program;
          77. A decrease of $8,150,000 to the Space 
        Interferometer Mission.

                             Space Science

    The Committee is concerned that the high radiation 
environment in the Jovian system will cause problems for the 
Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter (JIMO) mission unless an investment 
is made in developing effective and reliable hardened 
microcircuit devices that can be produced in quantity at 
reasonable cost. Presently, the only available option for 
producing such devices for the forthcoming JIMO mission 
involves using very high cost techniques for customized 
microdevice construction. However, the Committee is aware of 
promising technology wherein conventional, low cost, high 
volume device fabrication might be used to produce the required 
radiation hardened microcircuits in bulk using a variation on 
conventional techniques. The Committee directs NASA to 
undertake an immediate effort to validate this technology in 
time for use on the JIM mission and assess its potential for 
cost effectiveness for that purpose and for other missions.

                             Earth Sciences

    The fiscal year 2002 appropriations bill and accompanying 
reports gave NASA Congressional direction to establish an 
implementation plan for Earth science applications 
partnerships. NASA completed the report on its implementation 
plan in June of 2002 and forwarded the report to the Committee 
for its review. The result of the implementation plan was a 
competition from which awards were announced on July 2, 2003. 
The Committee notes that NASA received 258 proposals in 
response to the competition notice of a peer-review process and 
41 proposals were selected based on highest merit. The 
Committee commends NASA for moving forward with this effort and 
looks forward to working with NASA in the future to ensure 
adequate funding is provided for a more robust peer-reviewed 
competitive program. For this reason, the Committee 
recommendation does not include any funding for new remote 
sensing applications centers.
    The Committee directs $5,000,000 from the NASA Earth 
Science Enterprise be transferred to the Air Force Research 
Laboratory (PE 62204F Aerospace Sensors) to develop dual-use 
lightweight space radar technology.

                    Biological and Physical Research

    The Committee has included an increase of $3,000,000 for 
technology development necessary to ensure the Satellite Test 
of the Equivalence Principle (STEP) mission can move forward. 
While the STEP mission was rejected for funding under NASA's 
SMEX program last year primarily because of its lack of 
technology development, the Committee has found that this was 
due to promised funds not being provided from NASA's Office of 
Space Science. With this action, the Committee is not negating 
the results of the SMEX competition. Instead, the Committee 
action creates a level playing field so the STEP program can 
compete in future programs.
    The Committee continues its support for the materials 
science research community, and expects substantial progress to 
be made during fiscal year 2004 towards the completion and U.S. 
utilization of the Materials Science Research Rack-1 onboard 
the International Space Station.

                          Aerospace Technology

    The Committee continues to be concerned that insufficient 
effort is being made to modernize the Nation's air traffic 
management system. While NASA has requested $27,000,000 for a 
new initiative, the National Airspace System Transition 
Augmentation, the Committee remains concerned that there is a 
lack of government-wide coordination of air traffic management 
effort. As the Commission on the Future of the U.S. Aerospace 
Industry recommended, a National Program Office is needed to 
bring together the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security, 
Transportation, and Commerce as well as the Federal Aviation 
Administration and NASA with industry to develop the next 
generation air traffic management system for the United States 
that will improve the security, safety, quality, and 
affordability of aviation services. The Committee directs NASA 
to report on efforts within the Federal government to establish 
a National Program Office and report to the Committee by March 
31, 2004 on how its initiative on the National Airspace System 
Transition Augmentation is integrated into the National Program 
Office efforts.
    The Committee directs $5,000,000 within the Aerospace 
Technology Enterprise be transferred to the Air Force Research 
Laboratory (PE 602702F Command, Control and Communications) to 
deploy and develop Interactive Data Wall technology as part of 
a joint AFRL-NASA Information Operations Center of the Future 
research initiative.
    The Committee directs $3,000,000 within the Aerospace 
Technology Enterprise be transferred to the Air Force Research 
Laboratory (PE 602702F Command, Control and Communications) to 
conduct joint research with NASA on emerging areas of computing 
including grid computing, quantum and biomolecular information 
processing technology.
    The Committee notes that NASA's budget has proposed a 
significant increase in funding on aircraft engine programs to 
develop high risk, high payoff technologies to meet critical 
national aviation challenges. The Committee applauds NASA's 
commitment to addressing these important research needs and 
looks forward to working with NASA to ensure continued support 
for this research.

                           Education Programs

    The Committee has included $25,325,000 for the National 
Space Grant College and Fellowship program. This amount is an 
increase of $1,225,000 to the fiscal year 2003 pre-rescission 
appropriation of $24,100,000 and an increase of $6,225,000 to 
the budget request. The amount provided will fund the current 
core programs in 52 Space Grant Consortia, including 35 states 
at $475,000 each (including 7 upgrades), 17 states at $300,000 
each and $3,600,000 for Workforce Supplement Awards.
    The Committee remains concerned that NASA is no closer to 
solving its workforce problems than at this time a year ago. At 
that time, the Committee had directed NASA, in cooperation with 
the Nation's leading research universities, to develop a 
comprehensive plan and implementation strategy that will result 
in an increase in the number of students pursuing advanced 
degrees. While the education budget indicates NASA has a 
program of Explorer Academies starting in fiscal year 2003, 
very little information is provided which would give the 
Committee an assurance that this program will energize student 
interest in science, engineering, mathematics or other 
disciplines needed for NASA's future workforce. Likewise, the 
Education Base Program is listed in the budget material as 
being ``under review'' for alignment with new priorities. While 
this budget material in no way justifies the requested funding 
level of $169,800,000, the Committee has provided the budget 
request and directs NASA to inform the Committee expeditiously 
on its detailed plans for an education program in fiscal year 
2004.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $26,300,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        25,434,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        26,300,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +866,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............                 0


    The Office of the Inspector General was established by the 
Inspector General Act of 1978 and is responsible for audit and 
investigation of all agency programs.
    The Committee recommends $26,300,000 for the Office of the 
Inspector General in fiscal year 2004, an increase of $866,000 
to the amount provided in fiscal year 2003 and the same as the 
budget request for fiscal year 2004.

                       Administrative Provisions

    The bill includes five administrative provisions. The first 
provision allows for the availability of funds to remain until 
expended when any activity has been initiative for construction 
of facilities. The second provision makes all amounts 
appropriated for construction of facilities to remain available 
until September 30, 2006. The third provision allows for the 
Administrator to transfer amounts between aeronautics and 
crosscutting technologies. The fourth provision makes announced 
prizes available, without fiscal year limitation. The final 
provision allows unexpended balances of prior appropriations to 
be transferred to the new account established for the 
appropriations that provides such activity under this Act.

                  National Credit Union Administration


                       CENTRAL LIQUIDITY FACILITY

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Limitation on
                                   Limitation on        administrative
                                    direct loans           expenses
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004                   ($1,500,000,000)           ($310,000)
 recommendation...............
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation      (1,500,000,000)            (309,000)
Fiscal year 2004 budget             (1,500,000,000)                  (0)
 request......................
Comparison with fiscal year                     (0)             (+1,000)
 2003 appropriation...........
Comparison with fiscal year                     (0)                  (0)
 2004 request.................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The National Credit Union Central Liquidity Facility Act 
established the National Credit Union Administration Central 
Liquidity Facility (CLF) on October 1, 1979, as a mixed-
ownership government corporation within the National Credit 
Union Administration. It is managed by the National Credit 
Union Administration and is owned by its member credit unions. 
Loans may not be used to expand a loan portfolio, but are 
authorized to meet short-term requirements such as emergency 
outflows from managerial difficulties, seasonal credit, and 
protracted adjustment credit for long-term needs caused by 
disintermediation or regional economic decline.
    The Committee recommends a limitation of $1,500,000,000 on 
CLF lending activity to member credit unions from borrowed 
funds. This limitation represents the same level as fiscal year 
2003 and the same as the budget request. The Committee expects 
to be kept apprised of CLF lending activity.
    The Committee recommends the budget request of not more 
than $310,000 for administrative expenses.

               COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVOLVING LOAN FUND




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................        $1,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................         1,000,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................         1,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............                 0


    The Community Development Revolving Loan Fund Program 
(CDRLF) was established in 1979 to assist officially designated 
``low-income'' credit unions in providing basic financial 
services to low-income communities. Low-interest loans and 
deposits are made available to assist these credit unions. 
Loans or deposits are normally repaid in five years, although 
shorter repayment periods may be considered. Technical 
assistance grants are also available to low-income credit 
unions. Earnings generated from the CDRLF are available to fund 
technical assistance grants in addition to funds provided for 
specifically in appropriations acts. Grants are available for 
improving operations as well as addressing safety and soundness 
issues.
    The Committee recognizes that the technical assistance 
grant program is oversubscribed and therefore recommends that 
$1,000,000 be provided specifically for technical assistance 
grants to low-income and community development credit unions to 
be available for fiscal year 2004.
    The Committee strongly urges the NCUA to seek a partnership 
agreement with the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
to further expand credit union services in public housing 
developments plagued by unscrupulous financial intermediaries 
and check cashing operations.

                      NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $5,639,070,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     5,309,951,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     5,481,200,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........      +329,119,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............      +157,870,000


    Established in 1950, the National Science Foundation's 
primary purpose was to develop a national policy on science, 
and support and promote basic research and education in the 
sciences filling the void left after World War II. The 
Committee is committed to keeping the Foundation's current 
activities true to the founding purpose of supporting basic 
science.
    The Committee recommends a total of $5,639,070,000 for 
fiscal year 2004. This recommendation is an increase of 
$329,119,000 above last year's appropriation and an increase of 
$157,870,000 above the President's budget request.
    Of the amounts approved in the following appropriations 
accounts, the Foundation must limit transfers of funds between 
programs and activities to not more than $500,000 without prior 
approval of the Committee. Further, no changes may be made to 
any account or program element if it is construed to be policy 
or a change in policy. Any activity or program cited in this 
report shall be construed as the position of the Committee and 
should not be subject to reductions or reprogramming without 
prior approval of the Committee. Finally, it is the intent of 
the Committee that all carryover funds in the various 
appropriations accounts are subject to the normal reprogramming 
requirements outlined above.
    The Committee directs the NSF to remove the ``People,'' 
``Ideas,'' and ``Tools'' descriptions from the regular account 
chapters in the budget justifications and instead consolidate 
that information under the separate chapter titled 
``Investments and Strategic Goals.'' The Committee reminds NSF 
that the budget justification books are intended only for the 
Committees on Appropriations in order to provide further detail 
on the budget request. Information on strategic planning should 
be included in a separate chapter, and not a part of, the 
appropriations chapters.

                    RESEARCH AND RELATED ACTIVITIES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................    $4,306,360,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................     4,056,460,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................     4,106,360,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........      +249,900,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............      +200,000,000


    The appropriation for Research and Related Activities 
covers all programs in the Foundation except Education and 
Human Resources, Salaries and Expenses, Major Research 
Equipment and Facilities Construction, the National Science 
Board, and the Office of Inspector General. These are funded in 
other accounts in the bill. The Research and Related Activities 
appropriation includes United States Polar Research Programs 
and Antarctic Logistical Support Activities and the Critical 
Technologies Institute, which were previously funded through 
separate appropriations.
    The Committee recommends a total of $4,306,360,000 for 
Research and Related Activities in fiscal year 2003, an 
increase of $249,900,000 above last year's funding level and an 
increase of $200,000,000 above the budget request. The 
Committee's recommendation includes the following program 
levels:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              2004
             Directorate                2004 request     recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biological Sciences.................      $562,220,000      $586,841,000
Computer & Information Science &           584,260,000       609,846,000
 Engineering........................
Engineering.........................       536,570,000       560,067,000
Geosciences.........................       687,920,000       718,045,000
Mathematical & Physical Sciences....     1,061,270,000     1,107,745,000
Social, Behavioral & Economic              211,740,000       221,012,000
 Sciences...........................
Polar Programs......................       329,930,000       355,000,000
Integrative Activities..............       132,450,000       147,804,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Except as specifically noted herein, in allocating the 
increases provided by the Committee, the Foundation should give 
the highest priority to increasing research opportunities for 
investigator initiated research in the core scientific 
disciplines. Should the NSF find it necessary to pursue funds 
for ``emergency'' research needs at any time during the fiscal 
year, the Committee will make every effort to respond to 
appropriate reprogramming requests as quickly as possible.
    Within the funds made available for the Mathematical and 
Physical Sciences directorate, the Committee directs the NSF to 
use not less than $8,000,000 million for planning and design 
activites for the Rare Symmetry Violating Processes program in 
an effort to accelerate the construction phase of this program.
    From within the Engineering, Mathematical and Physical 
Sciences, and Computer and Information Science and Engineering 
Directorates and the National Nanotechnology Initiative, the 
Committee is concerned that researchers are reaching the 
physical limits of current complementary metal oxide 
semiconductor process technology and that this will have 
significant implications for continued productivity growth in 
the information economy. The Committee encourages NSF to 
examine the challenges and timelines outlined in the 
International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors and, where 
feasible, increase research support in this area accordingly.
    While the National Institutes of Health has principal 
responsibility for research involving human health and disease, 
NSF has historically played a critical role in funding long 
range basic research and technology development which have been 
critical to NIH's more focused mission. NSF's work on the basic 
chemical processes which made possible the mapping of the human 
genome is perhaps the best known example of this 
extraordinarily important collaboration. The Committee believes 
that the future of scientific advancement in both the physical 
sciences and the life sciences will increasingly rely on such 
collaborations and urges the NSF to work aggressively with NIH 
to determine how this research can be strengthened. The 
Committee has recently asked the NIH to convene a conference of 
all the stakeholder agencies within the Federal government 
whose missions involve the conduct or support of research at 
the scientific interface between the life sciences and the 
physical sciences. NSF is encouraged to play a leading role in 
this conference, which will hopefully occur during 2003. The 
Director should be prepared to testify to the Committee at 
NSF's appropriations hearings on the 2005 budget on the results 
of this conference as they relate to NSF and on any changes in 
resource allocations or management systems within NSF which 
would strengthen this critical area of research.
    The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for the Children's 
Research Initiative from within the Social, Behavioral, and 
Economic Sciences Directorate.
    For the Office of Polar Programs (OPP), an increase of 
$25,070,000 above the budget request, for a program level of 
$355,000,000, has been provided to enhance the ongoing research 
effort as well as to provide additional necessary resources for 
operations, research support and logistics, and science and 
research grant support. Expenses for the Antarctic operation 
programs have substantially increased due to the weather and 
unique situation created by lodged icebergs and three-year ice 
in the bay. The Committee has provided NSF with the flexibility 
to meet the funding needs in this situation and expects NSF to 
fully fund the Antarctic operations.

          Major Research Facilities Construction and Equipment





Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $192,330,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       148,538,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       202,330,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +43,792,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............       -10,000,000


    This account provides funding for the construction of major 
research facilities that provide unique capabilities at the 
cutting edge of science and engineering.
    The Committee recommends a total of $192,330,000 for the 
major research construction and equipment account for fiscal 
year 2004, an increase of $43,792,000 over the fiscal 2003 
funding level and $10,000,000 less than the budget request.
    The Committee's recommendation includes:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               2004
                 Project                   2004 request   recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atacama Large Millimeter Array (ALMA)...     $50,840,000     $50,840,000
EarthScope..............................      45,000,000      43,530,000
IceCube Neutrino Detector Observatory...      60,000,000      42,000,000
George E. Brown Jr. Network for                8,000,000       8,000,000
 Earthquake Engineering Simulation......
South Pole Station......................         960,000         960,000
Terascale Computing Systems.............               0      10,000,000
National Ecological Observatory Network       12,000,000      12,000,000
 (NEON).................................
Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP)               0      25,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2003, the Committee provided funds in addition to the 
budget request in order to complete or accelerate construction 
of two NSF projects: $25,360,000 for completion of the HIAPER 
project and $24,700,000 to accelerate the IceCube Neutrino 
Detector Observatory. Consequently, the Committee 
recommendation has taken the 2003 funding levels into 
consideration and adjustments were taken accordingly.
    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the Terascale 
Computing Systems and $960,000 for the South Pole Station in 
2004, the final year of funding for both of these projects.
    The Committee's recommendation includes $12,000,000 for a 
demonstration of the National Ecological Observatory Network 
(NEON) project as requested in the budget submission. The 
Committee cautions NSF that this funding is provided purely for 
two prototype sites to determine the scientific requirements 
and optimum configuration of the network. Further, before NSF 
deploys the two prototype stations and formulates future budget 
requests for this project, NSF must identify and quantify other 
Federal funding and observatory networks in order to avoid 
redundancy of Federal research dollars and reduce the overall 
cost of the NEON project. The Committee directs NSF to provide 
a preliminary report to the Committee no later than 18 months 
from the enactment of this legislation and a final report no 
later than 24 months after enactment. The Committee will not 
entertain further budget requests for NEON until the final 
report is submitted to the Committees on Appropriations.
    The Committee recommends $25,000,000 to start the 
construction phase of the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program 
(IODP) in 2004 instead of 2005.
    The Committee recommends funding for the preliminary 
planning and design phase of the RSVP program under the 
``Research and related activities'' account.

                     Education and Human Resources





Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $910,680,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       903,171,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       938,040,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        +7,509,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............       -27,360,000


    The Foundation's Education and Human Resources activities 
are designed to encourage the entrance of talented students 
into science and technology careers, to improve the 
undergraduate science and engineering education environment, to 
assist in providing all pre-college students with a level of 
education in mathematics, science, and technology that reflects 
the needs of the nation and is the highest quality attained 
anywhere in the world, and extend greater research 
opportunities to underrepresented segments of the scientific 
and engineering communities.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee recommends 
$910,680,000, an increase of $7,509,000 above last year's 
appropriated level and $27,360,000 below the budget request.
    The Committee's recommendation includes the following 
program levels:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               2004
                 Program                   2004 Request   Recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Math and Science Partnerships...........    $200,000,000    $140,000,000
EPSCoR..................................      75,000,000      90,000,000
Elementary, Secondary and Informal           194,450,000     204,450,000
 Education..............................
Undergraduate Education.................     142,100,000     146,440,000
Graduate Education......................     156,880,000     156,880,000
Human Resource Development..............     103,410,000     106,710,000
Research, Evaluation and Communication..      66,200,000      66,200,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee recommends $140,000,000 for the Math and 
Science Partnerships, while a decrease from the budget request, 
the funding level represents a $12,500,000 increase over the 
current year funding level.
    The Committee recommends $90,000,000 for the Experimental 
Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) program, an 
increase of $15,000,000 over the budget request and equal to 
the 2003 funding level.
    Within the Committee's recommendation for the Elementary, 
Secondary and Informal Education activity is an additional 
$10,000,000 over the budget request for Informal Science, 
bringing the total program level to $60,000,000, $1,000,000 
less than last year.
    Within the Undergraduate Education activity, an additional 
$6,840,000 above the budget request have been provided for the 
Advanced Technological Education (ATE) program for a total 
funding level of $45,000,000. No funds have been provided for 
the start of the Workforce for the 21st century program.
    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the Robert Noyce 
Scholarship Program, an increase of $3,000,000 over the fiscal 
year 2003 funding level and $6,000,000 over the budget request.
    Finally, within the Human Resource Development Activity, an 
additional $1,270,000 above the budget request has been added 
to the Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation 
(LSAMP) program for a total funding level of $34,000,000, and 
$2,030,000 above the budget request has been added to 
Historically Black Colleges and Universities Undergraduate 
Program (HBCU-UP) for a total 2004 program level of 
$22,000,000.
    The Committee recommends that all other programs and 
activities within the Education and Human Resources account not 
already mentioned above should be funded at the levels proposed 
in the NSF 2004 budget justification.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $215,900,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       189,115,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       225,700,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +26,785,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............        -9,800,000


    The Salaries and Expenses activity provides for the 
operation, support and management, and direction of all 
Foundation programs and activities and includes necessary funds 
that develop, manage, and coordinate Foundation programs.
    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $215,900,000 
for salaries and expenses, $9,800,000 below the President's 
budget request and an increase of $26,785,000 above last year's 
appropriated level.
    The Committee has only recently come to understand that the 
salaries and related costs associated with temporary employees 
working for the Foundation under Intergovernmental Personnel 
Act and similar authorities are not included in the Salaries 
and Expenses account. The Committee believes that these so-
called ``rotator'' personnel are part of the basic 
administrative structure of the Foundation and should be shown 
together with costs for Federal employees. The Committee 
expects future budget requests to consolidate such costs in 
this account.
    The Committee is a concerned with the current contract 
underway to examine the administrative and management structure 
of NSF, especially since NSF still has not completed a project 
plan. The Committee directs NSF to submit the final project 
plan to the Committee and the General Accounting Office for 
review when completed and further limits funding for this 
contract to $3,000,000 in fiscal year 2004.

                         National Science Board





Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................        $3,800,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................         3,477,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................                 0
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +323,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............        +3,800,000


    The National Science Board, established in 1950, 
establishes policies and assesses the quality, relevance and 
performance of the National Science Foundation's awards and 
capital investments. In addition, the Board provides advice to 
the President and the Congress on matters of science and 
engineering policy.
    The Committee recommends $3,800,000 for the operations of 
the National Science Board, an increase of $323,000 over last 
year's appropriated level and equal to the budget request, 
which was included under Salaries and expenses. A 
representation allowance of $9,000 has been provided for the 
Board.
    The Committee directs NSF to submit the budget for the 
Board in the fiscal year 2005 budget justification materials as 
a separate account, just as the Committee has provided funds 
for the Board in an account separate from the ``Salaries and 
expenses'' account.

                      Office of Inspector General





Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $10,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................         9,190,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................         8,770,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........          +810,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 request..............        +1,230,000


    This account provides National Science Foundation audit and 
investigation functions to identify and correct management and 
administrative deficiencies which could lead to fraud, waste, 
or abuse.
    For fiscal year 2004, the Committee has recommended 
$10,000,000 for the Office of Inspector General. This amount is 
$810,000 above last year's funding level and is $1,230,000 
above the budget request.

                 Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation


          PAYMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................      $115,000,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................       104,317,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................       115,000,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........       +10,683,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, established by 
title VI of Public Law 95-557 in October 1978, is committed to 
promoting reinvestment in older neighborhoods by local 
financial institutions working cooperatively with community 
people and local government. This is primarily accomplished by 
assisting community-based partnerships (NeighborWorks 
organizations) in a range of local revitalization efforts. 
Increase in homeownership among lower-income families is a key 
revitalization tool. Neighborhood Housing Services of America 
(NHSA) supports lending activities of the NeighborWorks 
organizations through a national secondary market that 
leverages its capital with private sector investment.
    The Committee recommends a funding level of $115,000,000 
for fiscal year 2004, the same amount as the budget request and 
an increase of $10,683,000 when compared to the fiscal year 
2003 appropriation.
    The Committee has included an administrative provision, as 
proposed in the budget submission, which would bring the NRC's 
compensation practices in line with those of federally 
chartered nonprofit corporations upon which NRC's authorizing 
statute was modeled.

                        Selective Service System


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Fiscal year 2004 recommendation.......................       $28,290,000
Fiscal year 2003 appropriation........................        26,308,000
Fiscal year 2004 budget request.......................        28,290,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2003 appropriation........        +1,982,000
Comparison with fiscal year 2004 budget request.......                 0


    The Selective Service System was reestablished by the 
Selective Service Act of 1948. The basic mission of the System 
is to be prepared to supply manpower to the Armed Forces 
adequate to ensure the security of the United States during a 
time of national emergency. Since 1973, the Armed Forces have 
relied on volunteers to fill military manpower requirements. 
However, the Selective Service System remains the primary 
vehicle by which men will be brought into military if Congress 
and the President should authorize a return to the draft.
    For fiscal year 2004, the bill includes the budget request 
of $28,290,000 for the Selective Service System, $1,982,000 
above the fiscal year 2003 funding level.

                      TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The Committee recommends inclusion of twenty-one general 
provisions, seventeen of which were carried in the fiscal year 
2003 Appropriations Act (Public Law 108-10).
    The Committee has modified a provision carried in the 
fiscal year 2003 Appropriations Act which stipulates that 
transfers to government Agencies must be made pursuant to 
Appropriations Acts.
    The Committee has included a new provision which changes 
names of accounts for the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration.

              House of Representatives Report Requirements

    The following items are included in accordance with various 
requirements of the rules of the House of Representatives.

                        Constitutional Authority

    Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives states: ``Each report of a committee on 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.

         Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

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

                           Transfer of Funds

    Pursuant to clause 3(f)(2), rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the following statements are made 
describing the transfers of funds provided in the accompanying 
bill.
    The Committee has included language transferring not to 
exceed $17,617,000 from compensation, pension and burial 
benefits to general operating expenses and medical services for 
priority 1-6 veterans. These funds are for the administrative 
costs of implementing cost-savings proposals required by the 
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 and the Veterans' 
Benefits Act of 1992. Language is also included permitting 
necessary sums to be transferred to the medical facilities 
revolving fund to augment funding of medical centers for 
nursing home care provided to pensioners as authorized by the 
Veterans' Benefits Act of 1992.
    The Committee recommends transferring the following amounts 
to the VA's general operating expenses appropriation pursuant 
to the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990: the veterans housing 
benefit program fund program account ($154,850,000), the 
education loan fund program account ($70,000), the vocational 
rehabilitation loans program account ($300,000) and the Native 
American veteran housing loan program account ($571,000). In 
addition, the bill provides up to $350,000 in general operating 
expenses and medical services for priority 1-6 veterans for 
administration of the guaranteed transitional housing loans for 
homeless veterans program account.
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Veterans Affairs which would transfer funds from the medical 
care collections fund to medical services for priority 7-8 
veterans.
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Veterans Affairs which would allows the transfer of funds 
between the medical services for priority 1-6 veterans and 
medical services for priority 7-8 veterans accounts.
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Veterans Affairs which would transfer balances as of August 1, 
2004 in the medical care collections fund to medical services 
for priority 7-8 veterans.
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Veterans Affairs which would allow the transfer of funds from 
medical administration and medical facilities accounts to the 
medical services for priority 1-6 veterans and medical services 
for priority 7-8 veterans accounts.
    The Committee recommends providing authority under 
administrative provisions for the Department of Veterans 
Affairs for any funds appropriated in 2004 for compensation and 
pensions, readjustment benefits, and veterans insurance and 
indemnities to be transferred between those three accounts. 
This will provide the Department of Veterans Affairs 
flexibility in administering its entitlement programs. Language 
is also included permitting the funds from three life insurance 
funds to be transferred to general operating expenses for the 
costs of administering such programs.
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development transferring all outstanding 
balances of funds appropriated to the section 202 program in 
prior years under the housing for special populations account 
to the housing for the elderly account.
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development transferring all outstanding 
balances of funds appropriated to the section 811 program in 
prior years under the housing for special populations account 
to the housing for the disabled account.
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development transferring all uncommitted 
prior balances of excess rental charges as of fiscal year 2003 
and all collections made during fiscal year 2004 to the 
flexible subsidy fund.
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development transferring the following 
amounts to the salaries and expenses account for administrative 
expenses: FHA mutual mortgage insurance and general and special 
risk insurance program accounts ($564,000,400); GNMA guarantees 
of mortgage-backed securities loan guarantee program account 
($10,695,000); Indian housing loan guarantee fund program 
account ($250,000); native Hawaiian housing loan guarantee fund 
($35,000); and Native American housing block grants account 
($150,000).
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development transferring up to $13,000,000 
from the manufactured housing fees trust fund to the 
manufactured housing standards program.
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development transferring no less than the 
following amounts to the working capital fund under the 
salaries and expenses account for development and management of 
information technology systems: housing certificate fund 
($3,010,000); public housing capital fund ($10,610,000); 
community development fund ($4,900,000); home investment 
partnership program account ($2,100,000); homeless assistance 
grants account ($2,580,000); housing for the elderly account 
($470,000); housing for persons with disabilities account 
($470,000); FHA mutual mortgage insurance program account 
($20,744,000); FHA general and special risk insurance program 
account ($16,946,000); Office of Inspector General ($300,000); 
and native American housing block grants account ($2,720,000).
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development transferring $24,000,000 from the 
various funds of the Federal Housing Administration to the 
Office of Inspector General.
    The Committee has included language under the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development transferring $32,415,000 from the 
federal housing enterprise oversight fund to the office of 
federal housing enterprise oversight account.
    The Committee has included language under the Environmental 
Protection Agency transferring funds from the hazardous 
substance superfund trust fund to the Office of Inspector 
General in the amount of $13,214,000. In addition, $44,697,000 
is transferred from the hazardous substance superfund trust 
fund to the science and technology account.
    The Committee has included language under the Federal 
Deposit Insurance Corporation transferring up to $30,125,000 
from the Bank Insurance Fund, the Savings Association Insurance 
Fund, and the FSLIC Resolution Fund to the Office of Inspector 
General.
    The Committee has included general transfer language under 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, space flight 
capabilities account and the science aeronautic and exploration 
account. This language will allow for the transfer of funds 
among these two accounts, as necessary, to reflect full cost 
accounting recently scheduled for implementation.
    The Committee has included general transfer language under 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration allowing the 
transfer of unexpired prior year balances in the old accounts 
to the appropriate accounts in the new budget structure.

                  Rescissions Recommended in the Bill

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

Department of Housing and Urban Development, Housing 
    Certificate Fund....................................  -1,372,000,000
Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
    Consolidated Fee Fund...............................               0
Department of Housing and Urban Development, Rental 
    Housing Assistance..................................    -303,000,000
Department of Housing and Urban Development, Urban 
    Development Action Grants...........................     -30,000,000

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

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

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SECTION 225 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN 
     DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2000

    Sec. 225. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
the amount allocated for fiscal [year 2000, and the amounts 
that would otherwise be allocated for fiscal year 2001 and 
fiscal year 2002] years 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 to the 
City of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on behalf of the 
Philadelphia, PA-NJ Primary Metropolitan Area (hereafter 
``metropolitan area''), under section 854(c) of the AIDS 
Housing Opportunity Act (42 U.S.C. 12903(c)), the Secretary of 
Housing and Urban Development shall adjust such amounts by 
allocating to the State of New Jersey the proportion of the 
metropolitan area's amount that is based on the number of cases 
of AIDS reported in the portion of the metropolitan area that 
in located in New Jersey.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


     DIVISION K--DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING URBAN 
DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2003

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                      Public Housing Capital Fund


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

    For the Public Housing Capital Fund Program to carry out 
capital and management activities for public housing agencies, 
as authorized under section 9 of the United States Housing Act 
of 1937, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1437g), $2,730,000,000 (the 
``Act''), to remain available until September 30, 2006: 
Provided, That of the total amount provided under this heading, 
in addition to amounts otherwise allocated under this heading, 
$447,000,000 shall be allocated for such capital and management 
activities only among public housing agencies that have 
obligated all assistance for the agency for fiscal years [1998, 
1999,] 2000[,] and 2001 made available under this same heading 
in accordance with the requirements under paragraphs (1) and 
(2) of section 9(j) of such Act: Provided further, That 
notwithstanding any other provision of law or regulation, 
during fiscal year 2003, the Secretary may not delegate to any 
Department official other than the Deputy Secretary any 
authority under paragraph (2) of such section 9(j) regarding 
the extension of the time periods under such section for 
obligation of amounts made available for fiscal year 1998, 
1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, or 2003: Provided further, That with 
respect to any amounts made available under the Public Housing 
Capital Fund for fiscal year 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, or 2003 
that remain unobligated in violation of paragraph (1) of such 
section 9(j) or unexpended in violation of paragraph (5)(A) of 
such section 9(j), the Secretary shall recapture any such 
amounts and reallocate such amounts among public housing 
agencies determined under 6(j) of the Act to be high-
performing: Provided further, That for purposes of this 
heading, the term ``obligate'' means, with respect to amounts, 
that the amounts are subject to a binding agreement that will 
result in outlays immediately or in the future: Provided 
further, That the Secretary shall issue final regulations to 
carry out section 9(j) of the United States Housing Act of 1937 
(42 U.S.C. 1437g(j)), not later than August 1, 2003: Provided 
further, That of the total amount provided under this heading, 
up to $51,000,000 shall be for carrying out activities under 
section 9(h) of such Act, of which up to $11,000,000 shall be 
for the provision of remediation services to public housing 
agencies identified as ``troubled'' under the Section 8 
Management Assessment Program and for surveys used to calculate 
local Fair Market Rents and assess housing conditions in 
connection with rental assistance under section 8 of the Act: 
Provided further, That of the total amount provided under this 
heading, up to $500,000 shall be for lease adjustments to 
section 23 projects, and no less than $18,600,000 shall be 
transferred to the Working Capital Fund for the development of 
and modifications to information technology systems which serve 
programs or activities under ``Public and Indian housing'': 
Provided further, That no funds may be used under this heading 
for the purposes specified in section 9(k) of the United States 
Housing Act of 1937, as amended: Provided further, That of the 
total amount provided under this heading, up to $50,000,000 
shall be available for the Secretary of Housing and Urban 
Development to make grants to public housing agencies for 
emergency capital needs resulting from emergencies and natural 
disasters in fiscal year 2003: Provided further, That of the 
total amount provided under this heading, $15,000,000 shall be 
for Neighborhood Networks grants for activities authorized in 
section 9(d)(1)(E) of the United States Housing Act of 1937, as 
amended: Provided further, That notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, amounts made available in the previous 
proviso shall be awarded to public housing agencies on a 
competitive basis as provided in section 102 of the Department 
of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989: Provided 
further, That of the total amount provided under this heading, 
$55,000,000 shall be for supportive services, service 
coordinators and congregate services as authorized by section 
34 of the Act and the Native American Housing Assistance and 
Self-Determination Act of 1996.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


   DIVISION K--DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN 
DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2003

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



                     Management and Administration


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

    For necessary administrative and non-administrative 
expenses of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
not otherwise provided for, including purchase of uniforms, or 
allowances therefor, as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 5901-5902; hire 
of passenger motor vehicles; services as authorized by 5 U.S.C. 
3109; and not to exceed $25,000 for official reception and 
representation expenses, $1,090,229,000, of which $20,000,000 
shall remain available until September 30, 2004, for funds 
control improvements; and of which $548,202,000 shall be 
provided from the various funds of the Federal Housing 
Administration, $10,343,000 shall be provided from funds of the 
Government National Mortgage Association, $1,000,000 shall be 
provided from the ``Community development loan guarantees 
program'' account, $150,000 shall be provided by transfer from 
the ``Native American housing block grants'' account, $200,000 
shall be provided by transfer from the ``Indian housing loan 
guarantee fund program'' account and $35,000 shall be 
transferred from the ``Native Hawaiian housing loan guarantee 
fund'' account: Provided, That funds made available under this 
heading shall only be allocated in the manner specified in the 
report accompanying this Act unless the Committees on 
Appropriations of both the House of Representatives and the 
Senate are notified of any changes in an operating plan or 
reprogramming: Provided further, That no less than $10,500,000 
shall be transferred to the Working Capital Fund for the 
development of and modifications to information technology 
systems: Provided further, That of the total amount made 
available under this heading, not less than $21,000,000 is to 
be made available to the Chief Financial Officer exclusively 
for activities to implement appropriate funds control systems, 
including improvements in automated financial management 
systems, additional training of departmental employees in 
proper fund control procedures, and establishment of a division 
of appropriations law within the Office of the Chief Financial 
Officer: Provided further, That the Chief Financial Officer 
shall submit a revised departmental funds control handbook to 
the Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate no 
later than 30 days after enactment of this Act: Provided 
further, That no official or employee of the Department shall 
be designated as an allotment holder unless the Office of the 
Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) has determined that such 
allotment holder has implemented an adequate system of funds 
control and has received training in funds control procedures 
and directives: Provided further, That the Secretary shall, 
within 30 days of enactment of this Act, permanently transfer 
no fewer than four appropriations law attorneys from the 
Legislative Division of the Office of Legislation and 
Regulations, Office of General Counsel to the OCFO: Provided 
further, That personnel transferred pursuant to the previous 
proviso shall report directly to the Chief Financial Officer: 
Provided further, That, notwithstanding any other provision of 
law, hereafter, the Chief Financial Officer of the Department 
of Housing and Urban Development shall, in consultation with 
the Budget Officer, have sole authority to investigate 
potential or actual violations under the Anti-Deficiency Act 
(31 U.S.C. 1341 et seq.) and all other statutes and regulations 
related to the obligation and expenditure of funds made 
available in this, or any other Act; shall determine whether 
violations exist; and shall submit final reports on violations 
to the Secretary, the President, the Office of Management and 
Budget and the Congress in accordance with applicable statutes 
and Office of Management and Budget circulars: Provided 
further, That the Chief Financial Officer shall establish 
positive control of and maintain adequate systems of accounting 
for appropriations and other available funds as required by 31 
U.S.C. 1514: Provided further, That for [the purpose of] 
purposes of funds control and determining whether a violation 
exists under the Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 1341 et seq.), 
the point of obligation shall be the executed agreement or 
contract, except with respect to insurance and guarantee 
programs, certain types of salaries and expenses funding, and 
incremental funding that is authorized under an executed 
agreement or contract, and shall be designated in the approved 
funds control plan: Provided further, That the Chief Financial 
Officer shall: (a) appoint qualified personnel to conduct 
investigations of potential or actual violations; (b) establish 
minimum training requirements and other qualifications for 
personnel that may be appointed to conduct investigations; (c) 
establish guidelines and timeframes for the conduct and 
completion of investigations; (d) prescribe the content, format 
and other requirements for the submission of final reports on 
violations; and (e) prescribe such additional policies and 
procedures as may be required for conducting investigations of, 
and administering, processing, and reporting on, potential and 
actual violations of the Anti-Deficiency Act and all other 
statutes and regulations governing the obligation and 
expenditure of funds made available in this or any other Act: 
Provided further, That the Secretary shall fill 7 out of 10 
vacancies at the GS-14 and GS-15 levels until the total number 
of GS-14 and GS-15 positions in the Department has been reduced 
from the number of GS-14 and GS-15 positions on the date of 
enactment of Public Law 106-377 by 2\1/2\ percent: Provided 
further, That the Secretary shall submit a staffing plan for 
the Department by March 15, 2003.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND RODENTICIDE ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    Sec. 136a-1. (i) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (5) Maintenance fee.--
                  (A) Subject to * * *
                  (B) In the case of * * *
                  (C)(i) The amount of each fee prescribed 
                under subparagraph (A) shall be adjusted by the 
                Administrator to a level that will result in 
                the collection under this paragraph of, to the 
                extent practicable, an aggregate amount of 
                [$20,000,000] $21,500,000 in [each] fiscal year 
                2004.
                  (D) The maximum * * *
                  (E)(i) For a small * * *
                  (F) The Administrator shall * * *
                  (G) If any fee * * *
                  (H) The authority provided under this 
                paragraph shall terminate on September 30, 
                [2003] 2004.
          (6) Other fees.--During the period beginning on 
        October 25, 1988, and ending on September 30, [2003] 
        2004, the Administrator shall * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (k) * * *
          (3) Expedited processing of similar applications.--
    (A) The Administrator shall use for each of the fiscal 
years 1997 through [2003] 2004, not more than \1/10\ of the 
maintenance fee collected * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


NEIGHBORHOOD REINVESTMENT CORPORATION ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    Sec. 605. (a) Employment, Compensation and Benefits.--The 
board shall have power to select, employ, and fix the 
compensation and benefits of such officers, employees, 
attorneys, and agents as shall be necessary for the performance 
of its duties under this subchapter, without regard to the 
provisions of title 5 governing appointments in the competitive 
service, classification, and General Schedule pay rates, except 
that no officer, employee, attorney, or agent of the 
corporation may be paid [compensation] salary at a rate in 
excess of the [highest rate provided for GS-18 of the General 
Schedule under section 5332 of title 5.] rate for level IV of 
the Executive Schedule. The Corporation shall also apply the 
provisions of section 5307 (a)(1), (b)(1), and (b)(2) of title 
5, United States Code, governing limitations on certain pay as 
if its employees were Federal employees receiving payments 
under title 5.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ACT OF 1958

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



TITLE III--MISCELLANEOUS

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


  Full Cost Appropriations Account Structure

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    Sec. [312] 313. (a) Appropriations for the Administration 
for fiscal year [2002] 2003 and thereafter shall be made in 
three accounts, ``[Human space flight] Space flight 
capabilities'', ``Science, aeronautics and [technology] 
exploration'', and an account for amounts appropriated for the 
necessary expenses of the Office of Inspector General. 
Appropriations shall remain available for 2 fiscal years. Each 
account shall include the planned full costs of the 
Administration's related activities.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (c) The [Administrator, in consultation with the Director 
of the Office of Management and Budget, shall determine what 
balances from the ``Mission support'' account are to be 
transferred to the ``Human space flight'' and ``Science, 
aeronautics and technology'' accounts. Such balances shall be 
transferred and merged with the ``Human space flight'' and 
``Science, aeronautics and technology'' accounts, and remain 
available for the period of which originally appropriated.''] 
unexpired balances of prior appropriations to the 
Administration for activities authorized under this Act may be 
transferred to the new account established for such activity in 
subsection (a). Balances so transferred may be merged with 
funds in the newly established account and thereafter may be 
accounted for as one fund under the same terms and conditions.

               Changes in the Application of Existing Law

    The Committee submits the following statements in 
compliance with clause 3, rule XXI of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, describing the effects of provisions proposed 
in the accompanying bill which may be considered, under certain 
circumstances, to change the application of existing law, 
either directly or indirectly.
    Language is included in various parts of the bill to 
continue ongoing activities and programs where authorizations 
have not been enacted to date.
    In some cases, the Committee has recommended appropriations 
which are less than the maximum amounts authorized for the 
various programs funded in the bill. Whether these actions 
constitute a change in the application of existing law is 
subject to interpretation, but the Committee felt that this 
should be mentioned.
    The Committee has included limitations for official 
reception and representation expenses for selected agencies in 
the bill.
    Sections 401 through 417 of title IV of the bill, sixteen 
of which were carried in the fiscal year 2003 Appropriations 
Act, are general provisions which place limitations or 
restrictions on the use of funds in the bill and which might, 
under certain circumstances, be construed as changing the 
application of existing law.
    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, the use of consultants, and 
programmatic areas within the overall jurisdiction of a 
particular agency.
    Language is included under the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, medical services for priority 1-6 veterans, setting 
aside and delaying the availability of certain equipment funds.
    Language is included under the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, medical facilities, setting aside and delaying the 
availability of certain land and structures funds.
    Language is included under the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, general operating expenses, providing for the 
reimbursement to the Department of Defense for the costs of 
overseas employee mail. This language has been carried 
previously and permits free mailing privileges for VA personnel 
stationed in the Philippines.
    Language is included under the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, construction, major projects, establishing time 
limitations and reporting requirements concerning the 
obligation of major construction funds, limiting the use of 
funds, and allowing the use of funds for program costs.
    Language is included under the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, construction, minor projects, providing that 
unobligated balances of previous appropriations may be used for 
any project with an estimated cost of less than $4,000,000, 
allowing the use of funds for program costs, and making funds 
available for damage caused by natural disasters.
    Language is included under the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, administrative provisions, permitting transfers 
between mandatory and discretionary accounts, limiting and 
providing for the use of certain funds, funding administrative 
expenses associated with VA life insurance programs from excess 
program revenues, extending authority to operate the Franchise 
Fund, allowing reimbursement from enhanced-use leases, allowing 
for reimbursement for certain services, requiring notification 
of new lease agreements, requiring disclosure of insurance and 
income information, designating funds for enterprise 
architecture activities, prohibiting funds for implementation 
of two sections of Public Law 107-287, allowing the Secretary 
to establish a priority system for medical services, allowing a 
recovery audit collection program, and allowing medical 
services funds for recreational and funeral expenses. Fourteen 
provisions have been carried in previous Appropriations Acts. 
Three provisions were carried in other parts of VA accounts and 
consolidated under administrative provisions. Two new 
provisions have been added.
    Language is included under the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, administrative provisions transferring balances in 
excess of a specified amount in the Medical Care Collections 
Fund to the medical services for priority 7-8 veterans account.
    Language is included under the Department of Veterans 
Affairs, administrative provisions allowing the transfer of 
funds between the medical services for priority 1-6 veterans 
account and the medical services for priority 7-8 veterans 
account.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, which designates funds for various programs, 
activities, and purposes, and specifies the uses of such funds.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, housing certificate fund, which specifies the 
allocation of certain funds; includes a reserve fund for 
certain purposes; sets forth certain reporting requirements; 
specifics the allocation of certain administrative funds and 
places limitations on the uses of certain administrative funds; 
and requires certain data to be submitted.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, public housing capital fund, which specifies the 
allocation of certain funds; limits the delegation of certain 
waiver authorities; waives certain penalties related to 
withholding of funds unless the Department takes action to 
implement necessary regulations; requires reallocation of 
certain funds; and prohibits funds from being used for certain 
activities.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, public housing operating fund, which designates 
certain funds to be distributed by the Attorney General through 
a reimbursable agreement; prohibits funds from being used for 
certain activities; and prohibits funds from being used to pay 
for prior year operations.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, revitalization of severely distressed public 
housing (HOPE VI), which prohibits the use of funds for awards 
to settle litigation or pay judgments; and specifies the 
allocation of certain funds.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, home investment partnerships program, which 
specifies the allocation of certain funds.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, homeless assistance grants, which establishes 
certain minimum funding and matching requirements; and requires 
grantees to integrate homeless programs with other social 
service providers.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, housing for the elderly, which specifies the 
allocation of certain funds; designates certain funds to be 
used only for certain grants; and allows the Secretary to waive 
certain provisions governing contract terms.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, housing for persons with disabilities, which 
specifies the allocation of certain funds; allows funds to be 
used to renew certain contracts; and allows the Secretary to 
waive certain provisions governing contract terms.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, flexible subsidy fund, which permits the use of 
excess rental charges.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, manufactured housing fees trust fund, which 
permits fees to be modified and permits temporary borrowing 
authority from the General Fund of the Treasury.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, fair housing and equal opportunity, which places 
restrictions on the use of funds for lobbying activities.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, management and administration, which specifies the 
allocation of funds; sets forth certain authorities of, and 
requirements on, the Office of the Chief Financial Officer; 
places limitations on personnel; and requires submission of a 
staffing plan.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, 
which permits temporary borrowing authority from the General 
Fund of the Treasury.
    Language is included under Department of Housing and Urban 
Development, administrative provisions, which maintains and 
reduces annual adjustment factors; prohibits funds to 
investigate or prosecute certain lawful activities; revises 
allocations for housing opportunities for persons with AIDS 
grant recipients; waives certain section 8 rental payment 
limits for a demonstration program; requires a competitive 
selection process for certain HUD programs; relates to the 
expenditures for certain corporations and agencies; relates to 
allocations of funds in excess of budget estimates; requires a 
competitive selection process for certain HUD programs; 
requires submission of a spending plan for certain activities; 
exempts some states from certain board membership requirements; 
and requires submission of certain repots regarding 
departmental funds.
    Language is included under Chemical Safety and Hazard 
Investigation Board, salaries and expenses, which limits 
certain personnel employed by the Board.
    Language is included under Department of the Treasury, 
Community Development Financial Institutions, community 
development financial institution program account, which sets 
aside funds for various purposes.
    Language is included under Corporation for National and 
Community Service, national and community service programs 
operating expenses, allowing funds to be used for education 
award-only grants under subtitle C and prohibiting funds for 
national service programs in other Federal agencies.
    Language is included under Corporation for National and 
Community Service, national service trust, limiting enrollment 
in the Trust.
    Language is included under Corporation for National and 
Community Service, administrative provisions allowing certain 
loans to be considered a qualified student loan and allowing 
certain grantees to be eligible for grants targeted to 
individuals with disabilities.
    Language is included under the Court of Appeals for 
Veterans Claims, salaries and expenses, permitting the use of 
funds for a pro bono program.
    Language is included under Department of Health and Human 
Services, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 
toxic substances and environmental public health, limiting 
availability of funds for toxicological profiles.
    Language is included under the Environmental Protection 
Agency, administrative provisions, which permits the 
Administrator to award cooperative agreements to Indian Tribes 
or Intertribal consortia under certain circumstances, prohibits 
the use of funds for implementation of a specific new pesticide 
tolerance fee, and which authorizes for one year a pesticide 
maintenance fee.
    Language is included under the Council on Environmental 
Quality, which limits the size of the Council.
    Language is included under the General Services 
Administration, Federal Citizen Information Center, limiting 
certain fund and administrative expenses.
    Language is included under the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration, administrative provision, extending the 
availability of construction of facility funds, permitting 
funds for contracts for various services in the next year, and 
transferring of prior year appropriations to the appropriate 
new appropriations accounts.
    Language is included under the National Credit Union 
Administration, central liquidity facility, limiting loans from 
borrowed funds and administrative expenses.
    Language is included under the National Science Foundation, 
research and related activities, providing for the use of 
receipts from other research facilities, requiring under 
certain circumstances proportional reductions in legislative 
earmarkings, and use of funds.
    Language is included under the National Science Foundation, 
education and human resources activities, requiring under 
certain circumstances proportional reductions in legislative 
earmarkings.

                  Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

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

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Appropriation in
          Agency/Program              Last year of       Authorization       last year of     Appropriation this
                                     authorization           level           authorization           bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Construction, Major:
    Seismic Corrections for Palo   .................  ..................  ..................        $14,013,000
     Alto, CA, Building 2........
    Seismic Corrections for Palo   .................  ..................  ..................         21,750,000
     Alto, CA, Building 4........
    Seismic Corrections for San    .................  ..................  ..................         31,000,000
     Francisco, CA, Building 203.
    Seismic Corrections for West   .................  ..................  ..................         27,200,000
     Los Angeles, CA, Building
     500.........................

 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
           DEVELOPMENT
Housing Certificate Fund:
    Section 8 contract renewals                 1994         $8,446,173          $5,458,106          18,097,564
     and administrative expenses.
    Section 441 contracts........               1994            109,410             150,000              23,517
    Section 23 leased housing                   1994             13,303   ..................                500
     conversions.................
    Section 8 preservation,                     1994            759,259             541,000             206,495
     protection, and family
     unification.................
    Incremental Vouchers.........               1994          2,060,725   ..................                  0
    Contract Administrators......  .................  ..................  ..................            100,000
Native American Housing Block                   2001          Such sums             636,000             661,600
 Grant...........................
Housing Opportunities for Persons               1994            156,300             156,000             297,000
 with AIDS.......................
Rural Housing and Economics        .................  ..................  ..................             25,000
 Development.....................
Empowerment Zones/Enterprise       .................  ..................  ..................             15,000
 Communities.....................
Community Development Fund:
    Community Development Block                 1994          4,168,000           4,380,000           4,358,650
     Grants......................
    Housing Assistance Council...  .................  ..................  ..................              3,300
    Native American Indian         .................  ..................  ..................              2,400
     Housing Council.............
    National Housing Development   .................  ..................  ..................              5,000
     Corporation.................
    National Council on La Raza    .................  ..................  ..................              5,000
     HOPE Fund...................
    Self-Help Housing Opportunity               2000          Such sums              20,000              28,000
     Program.....................
    Capacity Building............               1994             25,000              20,000              33,250
    Economic Development           .................  ..................  ..................            137,500
     Initiatives.................
    Neighborhood Initiatives.....  .................  ..................  ..................             21,000
    YouthBuild...................               1994             41,680              28,000              65,000
Brownfields......................  .................  ..................  ..................             25,000
HOME Investment Partnerships.....               1994          2,173,612           1,275,000           2,064,100
Homeless Assistance Grants.......               1994            465,774             599,000           1,242,000
FHA General and Special Risk
 Program Account:
    Limitation on guaranteed                    1995          Such sums         (20,885,072)        (25,000,000)
     loans.......................
    Limitation on direct loans...               1995          Such sums            (220,000)            (50,000)
    Credit Subsidy...............               1995          Such sums             188,395              15,000
    Administrative Expenses......               1995  ..................            197,470              93,780
GNMA Mortgage-Backed Securities
 Loan Guarantee Program Account:
    Limitation on guaranteed                    1996       (110,000,000)       (110,000,000)       (200,000,000)
     loans.......................
    Administrative Expenses......               1996          Such sums               9,101              10,695
    Policy Development and                      1994             36,470              35,000              47,000
     Research....................
    Fair Housing Activities, Fair               1994             26,000              20,481              20,250
     Housing Initiatives Program.
    Lead Hazards Reduction                      1994            276,000             185,000             130,000
     Program.....................
    Salaries and Expenses........               1994          1,029,496             916,963           1,122,130
Community Development Financial                 1998            111,000              80,000              51,000
 Institutions Fund...............
Neighborhood Reinvestment                       1994             30,714              32,000             115,000
 Corporation.....................
Consumer Product Safety                         1992             45,000              40,200              60,000
 Commission......................
Federal Citizen Information
 Center Fund:
    Federal Information Center...               1980              7,000               4,492              12,500
Interagency Council on the                   FY 1994              1,563   ..................              1,500
 Homeless........................
National Credit Union                           1979                  0                   0               1,000
 Administration, loan fund.......

 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Categorical Grants:
    Clean Air Act................            FY 1997          Such sums             167,230             228,550
    Radon Abatement Act..........            FY 1991             10,000               9,000               8,150
    Clean Water Act (FWPCA)......         FY 1990-91  ..................  ..................            492,900
    BEACH Act....................            FY 2005             30,000   ..................             10,000
    Safe Drinking Water Act......            FY 2003            115,000   ..................            118,600
    Solid Waste Disposal Act                 FY 1988             70,000              71,391             106,400
     (RCRA)......................
    Toxic Substances Control Act.            FY 1983              1,500               5,100               5,150
    Pollution Prevention Act.....            FY 1993              8,000               6,800               6,000
    Indian Environmental General             FY 1998          Such sums              38,585              62,500
     Assistance Program Act......
    Clean Water SRF..............            FY 1992          1,800,000           2,400,000           1,200,000
    Sewer Overflows..............            FY 2003            750,000   ..................                  0
    Drinking Water SRF...........            FY 2003          1,000,000   ..................            850,000
    Alaskan Native Village.......            FY 1979              2,000       Not available              25,000
Hazardous Substance Superfund....            FY 1994          5,100,000           1,480,853           1,275,000
LUST Trust Fund..................            FY 1988             10,000              14,400              72,545
Oil Spills (FWPCA)...............      No expiration             35,000              15,000              16,209
Science and Technology:
    Clean Air Act................            FY 1997          Such sums             177,150
    Clean Water Act..............            FY 1990            159,520              27,028
    FIFRA........................            FY 1991       95,000 (part)             11,890
    Safe Drinking Water Act......            FY 2003          Such sums              51,501
    ERDDA........................            FY 1981          1,115,591             217,828
Office of Inspector General......      No expiration          Such sums              34,019              36,808
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The statutory authority for appropriations in all eight of 
EPA's accounts is provided to the Agency through a wide variety 
of primarily media-specific statutes as shown in the following 
chart:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Terms of
                Section title                     Statute section        authorization           Expiration
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Federal Water Pollution Control Act

Res., Invest., Train., Tech. Asst., Info.      104(U)(1)...........  $22.77m, FY86-90....  33,146.
 Activ.
Train. Progs. for Treat. Works Personnel.....  104(U)(2)...........  $3m, FY86-90........  33,146.
Forecasting Manpower.........................  104(U)(3)...........  $1.5m, FY86-90......  33,146.
Agricul. Research............................  104(U)(4)...........  $10m, FY73-75.......  27,575.
Fresh Water Aquatic Ecosystems Res. Grants...  104(U)(5)...........  $15m, FY73-75.......  27,575.
Thermal Discharge Cont.......................  104(U)(6)...........  $10m, FY73-75.......  27,575.
Res., Dev., Demo. Grants Storm Water Poll.     105(H)..............  $75m, FY73-75, 10%    27,575.
 Cont.                                                                for 105(E).
Grants for Pollution Control and Enforce.....  106(A)..............  $75m, FY86-90.......  33,146.
Mine Wtr. Poll. Control......................  107(E)..............  $30m, until expend..  When expended.
Great Lakes Pollution Control Demo. Projects.  108(C)..............  $20m, until expend..  When expended.
Lake Erie Corp. of Eng. Deno. Project........  108(E)..............  $5m, until expend...  When expended.
Train, Grts., Cont., Schol...................  112(C)..............  $7m, FY86-90........  33,146.
Alaska Vill. Deno. Proj......................  113(D)..............  $2m.................  29,128.
In-Place Toxic Poll. Removal From Ports......  115.................  $15m................  When expended.
Hudson Bay PCB Reclamation Demo. Proj........  116(D)..............  $20m................  Indefinite.
Chesapeake-Bay Program.......................  117(D)..............  $3m, FY87-90........  33,146.
                                                                     $10m for grants,      33,146.
                                                                      FY87-90.
Great Lakes Program..........................  118(g)..............  $11m, FY87-91 (30%    9/30/91.
                                                                      to NOAA).
Assur. for Every State.......................  205(E)..............  $75m, FY79-90.......  9/30/90.
Reserve % for Admin. Specific Sections.......  205(G)..............  Limit subject to      No exp. date.
                                                                      formula.
Set-Aside for Altern. Conv. Sewage Treat.      205(H)..............  Limit subject to      No exp. date.
 Wrks.                                                                formula.
Altern. and Innovative Technologies-Fed.       205(I)..............  Limit subject to      9/30/90.
 Share.                                                               formula.
Reserve Con. Grants for WQ Mgt. Planning.....  205(J)..............  Limit subject to      No exp. date.
                                                                      formula.
Nonpoint Source Resrv........................  205(J)(5)...........  Limit subject to      No exp. date.
                                                                      formula.
Sewage Covey. Cost NYC-NTWTON Treatment Plant  205(K)..............  Limit subject to      9/30/82.
                                                                      formula.
Reim. for Treat. Works.......................  206(E)..............  $2600m for 206(a)...  When expended.
                                                                     $750m for 206(b)....  When expended.
Grants for Construct. of Treatment Works.....  207.................  $1200m, FY89-90.....  9/30/90.
Grants to Areawide Waste Mgt. Agencies.......  208(F)(3)...........  Such sums FY 83-90..  9/30/90.
Corps of Eng. Program of Tech Asst...........  208(H)(2)...........  $50m, FY73-74.......  6/30/74.
DOI.Natl. Wetlands Inv.......................  208(i)(2)...........  $6m.................  12/31/81.
Agri Contracts--Control Non-Point Source Poll  208(J)(9)...........  Such sums FY83-90...  9/30/90.
Water Resources Council Basin Planning.......  209(C)..............  $200m...............  When expended.
IAG Transf. to Supp. WQ......................  304(K)(3)...........  $100m, FY79-83......  9/30/90.
                                                                     Such sums FY84-90...  9/30/90.
Rev. Fund for Remov. of Oil or Haz. Sub.       311(K)..............  $35m................  No exp. date.
 Progs.
Clean Lakes Grants...........................  314(C)(2)...........  $30m, FY86-90 until   9/30/90.
                                                                      expend.
Clean Lakes Demo. Proj.......................  314(D)(4)...........  $40m................  When expended.
Natl. Study Commission.......................  315(H)..............  $17.25m.............  When expended.
Non-Point Source Mgt. Prog. Grants to States.  319(J)..............  $130m, FY-91 until    9/30/91.
                                                                      expend.
Sewage Sludge Studies........................  405(G)(2)...........  $5m, FY87...........  No exp. date.
Con. Grants--San Diego.......................  510(J)..............  $600m, FY94.........  No exp. date.
Oakwood Beach/Red Hood.......................  512(B)..............  $7m, FY87 and beyond  No exp. date.
Boston Harbor & Adj. Wtrs....................  513(D)..............  $100m, FY87.........  When expended.
San Diego Wastewater Reclamation Demo........  514(C)..............  $2m, FY87 and beyond  No exp. date.
Des Moines Sewage Plnt.......................  515(B)..............  $50m, FY87 and        No exp. date.
                                                                      beyond.
General Authorization........................  517.................  $135m, FY86-90......  9/30/90.
Studies of Wtr. Poll. Probs. in Aquifers.....  520(C)..............  $7m, FY87 and beyond  No exp. date.
Great Lakes Consumptv. Use Study.............  521(D)..............  $750k, FY87 and       No exp. date.
                                                                      beyond.
Sulfide Corrosn. Study.......................  522(D)..............  $1m, FY87 and beyond  No exp. date.
State Water Poll. Cont. Revolving Fund Auth..  607.................  $1.8b, FY92.........  9/30/94.

        Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002

Great Lakes--Remediation of Sediment           103.................  $50m, FY04-08.......  9/30/2008.
 Contamination.
Great Lakes--Public Information Program......  103 (13)............  $1m, FY04-08........  9/30/2008.
Great Lakes--Section 118(h) of FWPCA Amended.  105.................  $25m, FY04-08.......  9/30/2008.
Great Lakes--R&D; Program.....................  106.................  $3m, FY04-08........  When expended.
Lake Champlain--Protection Plan                120.................  $11m, FY04-08.......  9/30/2008.
 Implementation.
Center for Brownfields Excellence--Tech        305.................  $1m, none...........  No exp. date.
 Transfer.

  Beaches Environmental Assessment & Coastal
              Health Act of 2003

Coastal Recreation W.Q Monitoring &            406(l)..............  $30m, FY01-08.......  No exp. date.
 Notification.
       Marine Prot. Rsrch. & Sanct. Act

            Ocean Dumping Ban Act

For Title I..................................  111.................  $14m, FY94-97.......  When expended.

                Clean Air Act

General Authorization........................  327(A)..............  Such sums FY90-97...  9/30/97.
Local Impl. Revisn. Grants...................  327(A)(1)...........  $50m, FY91..........  9/30/91.

FIFRA--Food Quality Protection Act

Gen. Authorization/Res.......................  31..................  $95m, FY91..........  9/30/91.

    Asbestos School Hazards Abatement Act

    Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act

General Authorization........................  512.................  $100m, FY85-90......  9/30/90.
Estab. Trust Fund for Collect. Loan            4(A)/5(E)...........  $25m, FY87-90.......  No date spec.
 Repayments.

        Resource Conserv. & Recov. Act

           Solid Waste Disposal Act

Tire Shredding Grants........................  2004................  $750K, FY78-79......  9/30/79.
General Authorization........................  2007(A).............  $80m, FY88..........  9/30/88.
Criminal Investigators.......................  2007(E).............  $2.529m, FY88.......  9/30/88.
Undrgrnd. Storg. Tank Reg....................  2007(F)(1)..........  $10m, FY85-88.......  9/30/88.
St. Asst.-UST Prog. Dev......................  2007(F)(2)..........  $25m, FY85-88.......  9/30/88.
St. Haz. Wst. Prog. Grants...................  3011(A).............  $60m, FY88..........  9/30/88.
Grants to States for Invntory Haz. Wst. Sites  3012................  $25m, FY85-88.......  9/30/88.
Solid Wst. Prog. St. Grts....................  4008(A)(1)..........  $10m, FY85-88.......  9/30/88.
Grants for Studies & Market Analysis.........  4008(A)(2)(D).......  $10m, FY85-88.......  9/30/88.
St. Asst. for Provisns. Relt. to Recycled Oil  4008(A)(3)(A).......  $4m, FY82-86........  9/30/86.
Spec. Communities Disposal Site Grants.......  4008(E)(2)..........  $500K, FY85-88......  9/30/88.
Municip. Asst. for Enrgy. Conserv. & Recov.    4008(F)(2)..........  $8m, FY82-86........  9/30/86.
 Plang.
St. Asst. for Recycled Oil Programs..........  4008(G)(4)..........  $5m, FY85-88........  9/30/88.
Rural Community Grants.......................  4009(D).............  $15m, FY81-82.......  9/30/82.
Dept. of Commerce Funct......................  5006................  $1.5m, FY85-88......  9/30/88.
Resource Conserv. Comm.......................  8002(J)(5)..........  $2m.................  When expended.
Drilling Fluids. Study.......................  8002(M).............  $1m.................  When expended.
Special Studies..............................  8002(Q).............  $8m, FY78-79........  7/30/91
Res., Training & Info........................  8007................  $35m, FY78..........  9/30/79.
Medical Waste Tracking. Demo. Program........  11012...............  Such sums FY89-91...  9/30/78.
Natl. Ground Water Comm......................  04(I) Title VII.....  $7m, FY85-87........  1/11/87.

           Safe Drinking Water Act

Health Risk Red. & Cost Analysis in            1412(b)(3)(C)(iv)...  $35m, FY96-03.......  9/30/03.
 Regulation Dev.
Arsenic and Sulfate Studies..................  1412(b)(12)(A)(vi)..  $2.5m, FY97-00......  9/30/00.
Small Systems Operator Certification Grants..  1419(d)(3)..........  $30m, FY97-03.......  9/30/03.
Small PWS Technology Assistance Centers        1420(f)(6)..........  $2m, FY97-99........  9/30/99.
 Grants.
                                                                     $5m, FY00-03........  9/30/03.
Environmental Finance Centers................  1420(g)(4)..........  $1.5m, FY97-03......  9/30/03.
Sole Source Aquifer Demonstration Program....  1427(m).............  $15m, FY92-03.......  9/30/03.
State Programs to Establish Wellhead Prot.     1428(k).............  $30m, FY92-03.......  9/30/03.
 Areas.
State Ground Water Protection Grants.........  1429(f).............  $15m, FY97-03.......  9/30/03.
Tech. Assist. for Small Systems Circuit Rider  1442(e).............  $15m, FY97-03.......  9/30/03.
Emergency Assistance to States                 1442(d).............  $8,050k, FY91.......  9/30/91.
 (1442(a)(2)(B)).
Research, Tech. Assist., Info., Trng of        1442(d).............  $38,020k, FY91......  9/30/91.
 Personnel.
Grants for State Public Water................  1443(a)(7)..........  $100m, FY97-03......  9/30/03.
Underground Injection Control Grants.........  1443(b)(5)..........  $15m, FY92-03.......  9/30/03.
New York Watershed Protection Program........  1443(d)(4)..........  $15m, FY97-03.......  9/30/03.
Special Study and Demonstration Grants.......  1444(c).............  $10m................  6/30/77.
Grants to Public Sector Agencies for Dev. &    42 U.S.C. (300j-      $25m................  9/30/78.
 Demo. Proj.                                    3a(c)1).
Monitoring Program for Unregulated             1445(a)(2)(H).......  $10m, FY97-03.......  9/30/03.
 Contaminants.
Capitalization of Drinking Water SRFs........  1452(m).............  $1b, FY95-03........  9/30/03.
Grants to Sppt State Source WQ Prot.           1454(e).............  $5m, FY97-03........  9/30/03.
 Partnership Prog.
Drinking Water Assistance to Colonias........  1456(e).............  $25m, FY97-99.......  9/30/99.
Studies on Harmful Substances in Drinking      1458(c)(3)..........  $12.5m, FY97-03.....  9/30/03.
 Water.
Waterborne Disease Occurrence Study..........  1458(d)(3)..........  $3m, FY97-01 (with    9/30/01.
                                                                      limitations).
Grants to States for Remedying School          1465(c).............  $30m, FY91..........  9/30/91.
 Drinking Water.
General Drinking Water Research Authorization  201.................  Such sums (not to     9/30/03.
                                                                      exc. $26.593m).
Grants to Alaska to Improve Sanitation.......  303(e)..............  $15m, FY97-00.......  9/30/00.
Wastewater Assistance to Colonias............  307(e)..............  $25m, FY97-99.......  9/30/99.
Grants for Water Supply Sys. & Source WQ       401(d)..............  $25m, FY97-03         9/30/03.
 Prot. Prog.                                                          uncondit. auth.
                                                                     $25m, FY97-03
                                                                      condit. auth.

   Public Health Security and Bioterrorism
      Emergency and Response Act of 2002

Terrorist and Other Intentional Acts.........  1433................  $160M, FY02.........  9/30/2002.
                                                                     Sums as nec. FY03-05  9/30/2005.
Contaminant Prevention/Supply Disruption.....  1434-1435...........  $15m, FY02..........  9/30/2002.
                                                                     Sums as nec. FY03-05  9/30/2005.
Miscellaneous and Technical Amendments.......  403.................  $35m, FY02..........  9/30/2002.
                                                                     Sums nec. each FY     No date spec.
                                                                      thereafter.

           Pollution Prevention Act

EPA Activities--Source Reduct................  6610................  $8m, FY91-93........  9/30/93.
State Grants for Tech. Assist................  6610................  $8m, FY91-93........  9/30/93.

              Noise Control Act

Res., Dev.--Low Noise Prod...................  15(G)...............  $2.42m, FY77........  9/30/77.
General Authorization........................  19..................  $15m, FY79..........  9/30/79.

   Envir. Research, Development, & Demo Act

EPA Environ. Reserach & Dev. Activities......  2...................  ....................  9/30/81.
Health and Ecological Effects program........  2 CAA...............  $45.2m..............  FY81.
Industrial Processes program.................  ....................  $4.1m...............  FY81.
Monitoring and Technical Support.............  ....................  $20.8m..............  FY81.
Health and Ecological Effects................  2 CWA...............  $23.8m..............  FY81.
Industrial Processes.........................  ....................  $13.7m..............  FY81.
Public Sector Activities.....................  ....................  $14.3m..............  FY81.
Monitoring and Technical Support.............  ....................  $12.1m..............  FY81.
Health and Ecological Effects................  2 SDWA..............  $12.36m.............  FY81.
Public Sector Activities.....................  ....................  $14.08m.............  FY81.
Monitoring and Technical Support.............  ....................  $1.008m.............  FY81.
                                               2 SWDA..............  $26.446m............  FY81.
Health and Ecological Effects................  2 PHSA..............  $2.99m..............  FY81.
Monitoring and Technical Support.............  ....................  $191m...............  FY81.
Health and Ecological Effects................  2 IA................  $5.232m.............  FY81.
Monitoring and Technical Support.............  ....................  $2.868m.............  FY81.
Anticipatory Research........................  ....................  $14.745m............  FY81.
Health and Ecological Effects................  2 FIFRA.............  $5.97m..............  FY81.
Industrial Processes.........................  ....................  $2.9m...............  FY81.
Monitoring and Technical Support.............  ....................  $565k...............  FY81.
Health and Ecological Effects................  2 TSCA..............  $31.87m.............  FY81.
Industrial Process...........................  ....................  $1.77m..............  FY81.
Monitoring and Technical Support.............  ....................  $3.247m.............  FY81.
Health and Ecological Effects................  2 EA................  $50.096m............  FY81.
Energy Control...............................  ....................  $57.503m............  FY81.
Program Management...........................  2 EPA...............  $4.666m.............  FY81.

            Inspector General Act

OIG Approp. Accounts.........................  108.................  Amounts as            No exp. date.
                                                                      appropriated.

         Toxic Substances Control Act

             Radon Abatement Act

TSCA Research & Dev..........................  10..................  ....................  9/30/81.
State Programs...............................  28(D)...............  $1.5m, FY82-83......  9/30/83.
General Authorization........................  29(D)...............  $58.646m FY82, $62m,  9/30/83.
                                                                      FY-83.
Radon Profic. Rating.........................  305(E)..............  $1.5m...............  When expended.
Citizen Guide, Model Constr. Stds., Tech.      305(F)..............  $3m, FY89-91........  9/30/91.
 Asst.
Radon St. Prog. Grants.......................  306(J)..............  $10m, FY89-91.......  9/30/91.
Radon Diag./Remedial in High-Risk Schools....  307(B)..............  $1m & 500k (diag. &   When expended.
                                                                      remed.).
Region. Radon Trng. Ctrs.....................  308(F)..............  $1m, FY89-91........  9/30/91.

Comp. Env. Response, Compensation & Liability
                     Act

        Superfund Amend. & Reauth. Act

Emergency Plan. & Community Right to Know Act

Limit. on Sec. 515/516.......................  111(A)..............  $5.1b, FY91-94......  9/30/94.
Pilot Proj. for Removal of Lead Contam. Soil.  111(A)(6)...........  $15b................  No exp. date.
Worker Train. & Ed. Grts.....................  111(C)(12)..........  $20m, FY87-94.......  9/30/94.
Agency--Tox. Sub. Disease....................  111(M)..............  $60m, FY90-94.......  9/30/94.
Limit. on Rad. Demo. Prog....................  111(N)(1)...........  $20m, FY87-94.......  9/30/94.
Limit. on Maz. Sub. R&D;, Demo. and Training    111(N)(2)...........  $35m, FY91-94.......  9/30/94.
 Activ.
Gulf Coast Haz. Sub. R&D;, and Demo. Center...  118(i)(4)...........  $5m, FY87 and         No exp. date.
                                                                      thereafter.
Pacific Northwest Haz. Sub. R&D; and Demo.      118(O)(5)...........  $5m, FY87 and         No exp. date.
 Centr.                                                               thereafter.
Emer. Trng. & Review of Emer. Systems--St. &   305(A)(2)...........  $5m, FY87-90........  9/30/90.
 Locl.
Gen. Auth. T-111 Emer. Plan. Comm. Right to    330.................  Such sums beginning   No exp. date.
 Knw.                                                                 FY87.

Small Business Liability Relief & Brownfields
              Revitalization Act

Brownfield Revitalization Funding............  101.................  $200m...............  No exp. date.
Contiguous Properties........................  107.................  ....................  No exp. date.
Prospective Purchasers & Windfall Liens......  101.................  ....................  No exp. date.
Innocent Landowners..........................  101 (35)............  ....................  No exp. date.
State Response Programs......................  101.................  $50m................  No exp. date.
Additions to National Priorities List........  105.................  ....................  No exp. date.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                   Comparison With Budget Resolution

    Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and 
Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-344) 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(b) of the 
Act for the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution of 
then budget for the fiscal year. This information follows:

                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        302(b) allocation--                  This bill
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Budget                          Budget
                                                     authority        Outlays        authority        Outlays
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Discretionary...................................          90,034          95,590       90,033\1\          95,590
Mandatory.......................................          32,432          32,266          32,482          32,266
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.

                      Five-Year Outlay Projections

    In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the 
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, 
(Public Law 93-344), as amended, the following information was 
provided to the Committee by the Congressional Budget Office:

Outlays:                                                        Millions
    2004......................................................\2\ 76,073
    2005......................................................    18,030
    2006......................................................     7,984
    2007......................................................     4,129
    2008......................................................     3,448

\2\ Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

          Financial Assistance to State and Local Governments

    In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the 
Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, 
(Public Law 93-344), as amended, the Congressional Budget 
Office has provided the following estimate of new budget 
authority and outlays provided by the accompanying bill for 
financial assistance to state and local governments:

                                                                Millions
Budget Authority in bill......................................    30,728
Fiscal year outlays resulting therefrom.......................     6,538

           Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act

    During fiscal year 2004 for purposes of the Balanced Budget 
and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 99-177), 
the following information provides the definition of the term 
``program, project, and activity'' for departments and agencies 
carried in the accompanying bill. The term ``program, project, 
and activity'' shall include the most specific level of budget 
items identified in the 2004 Departments of Veterans Affairs 
and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies 
Appropriations Act, the accompanying House and Senate reports, 
the conference report of the joint explanatory statement of the 
managers of the committee of conference.
    In applying any sequestration reductions, departments and 
agencies shall apply the percentage of reduction required for 
fiscal year 2004 pursuant to the provisions of Public Law 99-
177 to each program, project, activity, and subactivity 
contained in the budget justification documents submitted to 
the Committees on Appropriations of the House and Senate in 
support of the fiscal year 2003 budget estimates, as amended, 
for such departments and agencies, as subsequently altered, 
modified, or changed by Congressional action identified by the 
aforementioned Act, resolutions and reports. Further, it is 
intended that in implementing any Presidential sequestration 
order, (1) no program, project, or activity should be 
eliminated, (2) no reordering of funds or priorities occur, and 
(3) no unfunded program execution, it is not intended that 
normal reprogramming between programs, projects, and activities 
be precluded after reductions required under the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act are implemented.

                          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:

                             ROLLCALL NO. 1

    Date: July 21, 2003.
    Measure: Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and 
Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations 
Bill, FY 2004.
    Motion by: Mr. Edwards.
    Description of motion: To substitute the amendment offered 
by Mr. Goode by providing funds for VA medical services offset 
by a reduction to tax cuts for certain income groups instead of 
a transfer from the VA Medical Administration account.
    Results: Rejected 25 yeas to 31 nays.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Boyd                            Mr. Aderholt
Mr. Clyburn                         Mr. Crenshaw
Mr. Cramer                          Mr. Culberson
Ms. DeLauro                         Mr. Cunningham
Mr. Dicks                           Mr. Doolittle
Mr. Edwards                         Mrs. Emerson
Mr. Farr                            Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Fattah                          Mr. Goode
Mr. Hinchey                         Ms. Granger
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Istook
Ms. Kaptur                          Mr. Kingston
Mr. Kennedy                         Mr. Kirk
Ms. Kilpatrick                      Mr. Knollenberg
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Kolbe
Mr. Mollohan                        Mr. LaHood
Mr. Moran                           Mr. Latham
Mr. Murtha                          Mr. Lewis
Mr. Obey                            Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Olver                           Mrs. Northup
Mr. Price                           Mr. Regula
Mr. Rothman                         Mr. Rogers
Ms. Roybal-Allard                   Mr. Sherwood
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Simpson
Mr. Serrano                         Mr. Taylor
Mr. Visclosky                       Mr. Vitter
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wamp
                                    Dr. Weldon
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Wolf
                                    Mr. Young

                             ROLLCALL NO. 2

    Date: July 21, 2003.
    Measure: Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and 
Urban Development, and Independent Agencies Appropriations 
Bill, FY 2004.
    Motion by: Mr. Edwards.
    Description of motion: To add $2,200,000,000 to VA medical 
services for priority 1-6 veterans offset by a reduction to tax 
cuts for certain income groups.
    Results: Rejected 26 yeas to 32 nays.
        Members Voting Yea            Members Voting Nay
Mr. Bishop                          Mr. Aderholt
Mr. Boyd                            Mr. Crenshaw
Mr. Clyburn                         Mr. Culberson
Mr. Cramer                          Mr. Cunningham
Ms. DeLauro                         Mr. Doolittle
Mr. Dicks                           Mrs. Emerson
Mr. Edwards                         Mr. Frelinghuysen
Mr. Farr                            Mr. Goode
Mr. Fattah                          Ms. Granger
Mr. Hinchey                         Mr. Istook
Mr. Hoyer                           Mr. Kingston
Mr. Jackson                         Mr. Kirk
Ms. Kaptur                          Mr. Knollenberg
Mr. Kennedy                         Mr. Kolbe
Ms. Kilpatrick                      Mr. LaHood
Mrs. Lowey                          Mr. Latham
Mr. Mollohan                        Mr. Lewis
Mr. Moran                           Mr. Nethercutt
Mr. Obey                            Mrs. Northup
Mr. Olver                           Mr. Regula
Mr. Price                           Mr. Rogers
Mr. Rothman                         Mr. Sherwood
Ms. Roybal-Allard                   Mr. Simpson
Mr. Sabo                            Mr. Taylor
Mr. Serrano                         Mr. Tiahrt
Mr. Visclosky                       Mr. Vitter
                                    Mr. Walsh
                                    Mr. Wamp
                                    Dr. Weldon
                                    Mr. Wicker
                                    Mr. Wolf
                                    Mr. Young
                                    
                                    

       DISSENTING VIEWS OF HON. DAVID OBEY AND HON. CHET EDWARDS

    The appropriations bill for the Departments of Veterans, 
Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies reported 
by the Committee is wholly inadequate in its attempt to provide 
resources for the needs of many of our most deserving citizens. 
This is especially true with veterans--those men and women who 
made sacrifice after sacrifice to guarantee our freedom. 
Veterans who have laid their lives on the line deserve more 
than waving flags and grateful words. Unfortunately, this bill 
fails to meet many of its basic obligations to these veterans, 
especially in funding for the VA medical care system.
    In 1995, VA treated 2.7 millions veterans; in 2002 there 
were approximately 4.5 million patients. An additional 600,000 
veterans are projected to enroll in VA health care in 2003. The 
$1.3 billion increase requested in the Administration's budget 
for veterans' medical care and approved by the Committee is, 
simply, not enough. Overall, the amount provided in the bill 
for veterans' health care is $1.1 billion less than the $2.4 
billion increase provided by the Congress last year for 
veterans' health care. Enrollment in the VA medical care system 
continues to grow at a rate of 9 percent per year and inflation 
in medical care exceeds 3 percent. To deal with this 12 percent 
minimum requirement just to maintain current services the bill 
provides less than a 6 percent actual increase in funding. The 
result is that the system cannot meet the increased demand for 
services let alone address the large need for new investments 
within the VA health care network.
    Insufficient funding has put a huge strain on the system. 
More than 235,000 veterans are currently waiting six months or 
more for initial appointments and many veterans have reported 
waiting two years to see a doctor. With so many veterans 
waiting for care, VA has now reached capacity at many health-
care facilities and has closed enrollment to new patients at 
many hospitals and clinics. Additionally, the VA has placed a 
moratorium on all outreach activities to veterans to squelch 
demand.
    The Committee bill ignores the pledge made to veterans 
groups by the House leadership. Veterans have been betrayed and 
deceived. The Congress and the Republican Leadership of the 
House have reneged on its promise made in the context of the FY 
2004 Budget Resolution to provide a $3.4 billion increase over 
the FY 2003 level for veterans' medical care. The concerns of 
the veterans groups are expressed in the attached letter from 
the Independent Budget group, as well as by numerous other 
veterans' organizations. Here are some of the comments made by 
the veterans' service organizations:

          The VA-HUD-Independent Agencies appropriations bill, 
        which calls for a $1.4 billion increase over last year 
        and approximately the President's request, is wholly 
        inadequate to provide health care to sick and disabled 
        veterans and represents a flagrant disregard of 
        promises made to veterans by this Congress * * * (The 
        Independent Budget, July 18, 2003)
          So much for promises * * * The funding levels and 
        cost-shifting schemes are specifically designed to 
        ration care at VA hospitals, increase waiting times for 
        services and rely on higher fees and co-payments from 
        certain sick and disabled veterans to subsidize the 
        health care for others (Press release, AMVETS, DAV, 
        PVA, VFW, July 18, 2003)

    My greatest disappointment with this bill is that the 
drastic cuts made to the various programs in this bill are 
preventable, the result of the myopic focus of the House 
Republican Leadership on tax cuts as their top, if not only, 
priority--regardless of the consequences. This VA-HUD bill 
reflects this policy as veterans, as well as housing, and 
environmental programs, are reduced to finance taxes for many 
very wealthy Americans. We on the Minority want to be clear 
that we reject this Republican fiscal policy. We believe that 
the current bill is not an adequate response to the needs of 
the American people. This country and its leadership have the 
ability, even in difficult economic times, to provide the 
necessary resources to serve its veterans, provide adequate 
housing for its elderly, disabled and indigent citizens, 
protect its environment and support basis scientific research, 
if they so choose.
    It is my view, and that of many on the Minority, that the 
bill, as currently written, is not an adequate response to the 
needs of the American people. For these reason, I would urge 
all Members to vote against any rule which does not permit 
amendments to address these failings. Members should insist 
that this Congress honor the promise it made to American's 
veterans and provide additional funds for veterans health care 
and other critical programs.

                                   Dave Obey.
                                   Chet Edwards.

            ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF THE HONORABLE ALAN MOLLOHAN

    The appropriations bill for the Departments of Veterans, 
Housing and Urban Development and Independent Agencies reported 
by the Committee reflects the sincere effort of a very capable 
Subcommittee Chairman to allocate scarce resources fairly and 
thoughtfully among many of the most critical programs of our 
federal government. These include health care for our veterans, 
investments in basic scientific research, housing programs for 
the most vulnerable of our citizens and programs to protect and 
improve the environment. The Subcommittee Chairman consulted 
with the Minority Members of the Committee throughout this 
difficult process and bill reflects our views and 
recommendations in many areas. Unfortunately, a fair and open 
process presided over by a capable chairman committed to 
meeting the needs of the country cannot make up for an overall 
allocation of funds to the subcommittee which is inadequate. 
Thus, in the end, this bill does not adequately meet many 
obligations because there was just not enough funding available 
to the Majority.
    I would be remiss if I did not recognize the positive 
aspects of the bill. These include restoration of many of the 
cuts proposed by the President as well as making some important 
investments. Within very constrained resources, the bill 
provides a relatively generous $330 million, 6 percent, 
increase for basic science programs at the National Science 
Foundation. These funds may provide the next generation with 
the fundamental scientific advances that lead to new sources of 
energy, new mechanisms of communication beyond the Internet, 
and a basic understanding of the chemistry and biology 
underlying the life processes.
    For the Department of Housing and Urban Development the 
bill provides a $1.3 billion increase for the section 8 low-
income housing program, necessary to renew all vouchers using 
the latest verified per unit cost data and provide a cushion 
for those housing agencies that are increasing their 
utilization rates. We continue to make every effort to maintain 
our commitment of funding all voucher renewals. This bill again 
makes changes to section 8 administrative fees and we hope to 
work with the majority to ensure that this new process is fair 
and equitable to both large and small public housing 
authorities. Lastly, the bill provides level funding or slight 
increase for most other HUD accounts.
    The bill recognizes within its restricted allocation that 
veterans health care is a top priority by providing an increase 
for this program of $1.3 billion. Although insufficient, this 
does represent nearly half of the total increase available for 
the entire bill.
    The bill also provides $480 million for the Corporation for 
National and Community Service, $96 million above the current 
year's appropriation. It must be noted that it is very rare for 
a House appropriations bill to contain funding for this 
program. The Chairman is to be recognized for this effort in 
light of the Corporation's recent financial difficulties and 
the limits they have placed on the AmeriCorp program. While 
this funding is an endorsement of the merit of the volunteer 
programs, the Corporation must undertake significant financial 
and accounting reforms to maintain such support in the future.
    Unfortunately, like most of the accounts in this bill, NASA 
is essentially flat-funded with a mere one percent increase 
above last year's level. The report accompanying this bill 
states that the Committee has chosen to defer decisions in many 
areas until the Gehman Board's report concerning the loss of 
the Columbia shuttle is released. This is a wise decision. The 
issue we face, however, is how do we fund the necessary changes 
and improvements recommended by the Board's report and NASA's 
response to this report? How will we find additional monies to 
fully address the challenges NASA will have to overcome to 
return to flight? We must work to ensure that NASA has the 
appropriations needed to safely operate the shuttle and to make 
the necessary technology investments to develop a replacement 
vehicle.
    There are several programs in the bill that did not see 
increases at all. While most of the programs at HUD are funded 
at or about last year's level, the Shelter Plus Care program 
was again merged with the Homeless Assistance Grants program. 
The Committee was also unable to fully fund the President's 
budget request for homeless grants and did not fund HUD's new 
homeless initiative--the Samaritan program. This does nothing 
to meet the President's stated priority of ending chronic 
homelessness in ten years. Within EPA, the president's request 
for clean-up of Superfund sites has been reduced by $114 
million. Further, the Committee has provided only $51 million 
to the Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) 
fund--down from $75 million in last year's bill.
    In a few areas, however, the funding provided in the bill 
is clearly inadequate. We are especially concerned by major 
shortfalls in three critical areas.
    I cannot support the recommendation to drastically cut 
funding for HUD's HOPE VI program, which not only eliminates 
obsolete public housing but also replaces it with mixed-income 
neighborhood revitalizing developments. The recommendation to 
reduce funding for HOPE VI from the $570 million provided for 
fiscal year 2003 to $50 million, as recommended in this bill, 
is essentially a recommendation to terminate HOPE VI. 
Eliminating the program will shortchange communities around the 
county. In addition to being an important program for the 
revitalization of our communities, there has been bipartisan 
support for this program in the House of Representatives.
    The Committee's decision to reduce funding for the Clean 
Water State Revolving Fund from $1.35 billion in the current 
year to $1.2 billion is an excellent example of the difficult 
choices the bill's inadequate allocations has forced. Given the 
large number of requests from Members of the House for 
assistance with their communities needs for clean drinking 
water and waste water treatment systems, how can Congress 
justify reducing funding for the main federal program to assist 
local communities in their efforts to fix their decaying water 
treatment systems? Last September, Environmental Protection 
Agency Administrator Whitman released a major study entitled 
the Water Gap Analysis showing a funding shortfall nationwide 
in this area of at least $380 billion. This report is a call 
for increased funding, not a justification for a $150 million 
reduction.
    By far the most serious problem with this bill, however, is 
its failure to adequately address the health care needs of our 
veterans. The $1.3 billion increase requested in the 
Administration's budget and approved by the Committee is, 
simply, not enough. Overall, the amount provided in the bill 
for veterans' medical care is a $1.1 billion less than the $2.4 
increase provided by the Congress last year for veterans' 
medical care. Medical care inflation is still running at near 
double-digit levels and enrollment continues to grow.
    Inadequate funding has put a huge strain on the system. 
More than 235,000 veterans are currently waiting six months or 
more for initial appointments and many veterans have reported 
waiting two years to see a doctor in certain parts of the 
country. With so many veterans waiting for care, VA has now 
reached capacity at many health-care facilities and has closed 
enrollment to new patients at many hospitals and clinics. 
Additionally, the VA has placed a moratorium on all marketing 
and outreach activities to veterans. The inability of the 
Committee to address these needs can only lead veterans to 
conclude that the Republican Leadership of the House has 
reneged on its promise made in the context of the FY 2004 
Budget Resolution to provide a $3.4 billion increase over the 
FY 2003 level.
    Every Member will have to judge these funding decisions 
when he or she decides how to vote when the bill is presented 
to the House. The greatest frustration with this bill is that 
the shortcomings that we have outlined are unnecessary. This 
country, even in difficult economic times, has the resources to 
serve its veterans, provide adequate housing for its elderly, 
disabled and indigent citizens, protect its environment and 
support basic scientific research. But adequate resources have 
been denied to the Committee to meet these obligations. This 
critical failing is the result solely of the myopic budgetary 
priorities of the House Republican Leadership with a focus on 
tax cuts as their top, if not only, priority. This VA-HUD bill 
is perhaps one of the best examples of the impact of taking 
funding out of the treasury to provide tax cuts for the very 
wealthy, forcing reductions in program for veterans, housing, 
and the environment. We on the Minority want to be clear that 
we reject this Republican fiscal policy and that we are hopeful 
that substantial additional funding can be found for this bill 
before it becomes law. The allocation for this bill is not 
adequate to meet the needs of the American people.

                                                  Alan B. Mollohan.