Report text available as:

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

108th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     108-542

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



 
  DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 
                                  2005

                                _______
                                

 June 15, 2004.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Taylor of North Carolina, from the Committee on Appropriations, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 4568]

    The Committee on Appropriations submits the following 
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making 
appropriations for the Department of the Interior and Related 
Agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2005. The 
bill provides regular annual appropriations for the Department 
of the Interior (except the Bureau of Reclamation) and for 
other related agencies, including the Forest Service, the 
Department of Energy, the Indian Health Service, the 
Smithsonian Institution, and the National Foundation on the 
Arts and the Humanities.

                                CONTENTS

                                                            Page number

                                                            Bill Report
Department of the Interior:
        Bureau of Land Management..........................     2
                                                                      8
        U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.....................    11
                                                                     22
        National Park Service..............................    20
                                                                     34
        U.S. Geological Survey.............................    28
                                                                     54
        Minerals Management Service........................    31
                                                                     59
        Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 
            Enforcement....................................    34
                                                                     63
        Bureau of Indian Affairs...........................    36
                                                                     68
        Departmental Offices...............................    44
                                                                     77
        General Provisions.................................    51
                                                                     87
Related Agencies:
        Forest Service, USDA...............................    66
                                                                     89
        Department of Energy...............................    81
                                                                    112
                Clean Coal Technology......................    81
                                                                    112
                Fossil Energy..............................    82
                                                                    112
                Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves.....    84
                                                                    119
                Energy Conservation........................    85
                                                                    121
                Economic Regulation........................
                                                                    126
                Strategic Petroleum Reserve................    85
                                                                    126
                Energy Information Administration..........    86
                                                                    127
        Indian Health Service, DHHS........................    88
                                                                    128
        Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation........    96
                                                                    134
        Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native 
            Culture and Arts Development...................    97
                                                                    135
        Smithsonian Institution............................    97
                                                                    135
        National Gallery of Art............................   101
                                                                    138
        John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.....   102
                                                                    139
        Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars...   103
                                                                    139
        National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities.   103
                                                                    140
        Commission of Fine Arts............................   105
                                                                    144
        Advisory Council on Historic Preservation..........   106
                                                                    145
        National Capital Planning Commission...............   106
                                                                    145
        United States Holocaust Memorial Museum............   106
                                                                    146
        Presidio Trust.....................................   107
                                                                    146
Title III--General Provisions..............................   107
                                                                    146
Title IV--Supplemental Wildland Fire Suppression...........   136
                                                                    149

                   Comparison With Budget Resolution

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

                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Sec. 302(b)                       This bill--
                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Discretionary      Mandatory      Discretionary      Mandatory
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget authority............................           19,499               52           19,999               52
Outlays.....................................           19,788               59           20,205               59
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--The amounts in this bill are technically in excess of the subcommittee section 302(b) suballocation.
  However, pursuant to section 312 of S.Con.Res. 95 (108th Congress), increases to the Committee's section
  302(a) allocation are authorized for funding in the reported bill for wildland fire suppression. After the
  bill is reported to the House, the Chairman of the Committee on the Budget will provide an increased section
  302(a) allocation consistent with the funding provided in the bill. That new allocation will be suballocated
  to the Interior subcommittee and will eliminate the technical difference prior to floor consideration.

                          Summary of the Bill

    The Committee has conducted hearings on the programs and 
projects provided for in the Interior and Related Agencies 
Appropriations bill for 2005. The hearings are contained in 8 
published volumes totaling nearly 9,200 pages.
    During the course of the hearings, testimony was taken at 
11 hearings on 10 days, not only from agencies which come under 
the jurisdiction of the Interior Subcommittee, but also from 
Members of Congress, and, in written form, from State and local 
government officials, and private citizens.
    The bill that is recommended for fiscal year 2005 has been 
developed after careful consideration of all the facts and 
details available to the Committee.

                                  BUDGET AUTHORITY RECOMMENDED IN BILL BY TITLE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 Committee bill
                        Activity                         Budget estimates,   Committee bill,     compared with
                                                          fiscal year 2005   fiscal year 2005   budget estimates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I, Department of the Interior: New Budget             $9,971,229,000     $9,757,951,000      -$213,348,000
 (obligational) authority..............................
Title II, related agencies: New Budget (obligational)       10,006,186,000      9,772,174,000        +57,188,000
 authority.............................................
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Grand total, New Budget (obligational) authority.     19,977,485,000     19,530,125,000       -156,160,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Total Appropriations for the Department of the Interior and Related 
                                Agencies

    In addition to the amounts in the accompanying bill, which 
are reflected in the table above, permanent legislation 
authorizes the continuation of certain government activities 
without consideration by the Congress during the annual 
appropriations process.
    Details of these activities are listed in tables at the end 
of this report. In fiscal year 2004, these activities are 
estimated to total $3,979,525,000. The estimate for fiscal year 
2005 is $4,721,101,000.
    The following table reflects the total budget 
(obligational) authority contained both in this bill and in 
permanent appropriations for fiscal years 2004 and 2005.

        DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES TOTAL BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEARS 2004-2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Item                            Fiscal year 2004   Fiscal year 2005        Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interior and related agencies appropriations bill......       *$19,787,021   *$19,530,125,000     *-$256,896,000
Permanent appropriations, Federal funds................      2,921,714,000      2,967,272,000        +45,558,000
Permanent appropriations, trust funds..................      1,057,811,000      1,104,829,000        +47,018,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total budget authority...........................     23,993,712,000     23,602,226,000       -164,320,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* After adjusting for the transfer of jurisdiction for the weatherization program (see discussion under
  Department of Energy, Energy Conservation).

                 Revenue Generated by Agencies in Bill

    The following tabulation indicates total new obligational 
authority to date for fiscal years 2003 and 2004, and the 
amount recommended in the bill for fiscal year 2005. It 
compares receipts generated by activities in this bill on an 
actual basis for fiscal year 2003 and on an estimated basis for 
fiscal years 2004 and 2005. The programs in this bill are 
estimated to generate $10.2 billion in revenues for the Federal 
Government in fiscal year 2005. Therefore, the expenditures in 
this bill will contribute to economic stability rather than 
inflation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Fiscal year--
                          Item                          --------------------------------------------------------
                                                                2003               2004               2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New obligational authority.............................    $20,111,480,000    $20,014,187,000    $19,530,125,000
Receipts:
    Department of the Interior.........................      8,938,149,000      8,882,670,000      9,797,219,000
    Forest Service.....................................        343,338,000        406,615,000        428,143,000
    Naval Petroleum Reserves...........................          7,403,000          6,927,000          7,173,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total receipts...................................      9,288,890,000      9,296,212,000     10,232,535,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   Application of General Reductions

    The level at which sequestration reductions shall be taken 
pursuant to the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control 
Act of 1985, if such reductions are required in fiscal year 
2005, is defined by the Committee as follows:
    As provided for by section 256(l)(2) of Public Law 99-177, 
as amended, and for the purpose of a Presidential Order issued 
pursuant to section 254 of said Act, the term ``program, 
project, and activity'' for items under the jurisdiction of the 
Appropriations Subcommittees on the Department of the Interior 
and Related Agencies of the House of Representatives and the 
Senate is defined as (1) any item specifically identified in 
tables or written material set forth in the Interior and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, or accompanying committee 
reports or the conference report and accompanying joint 
explanatory statement of the managers of the committee of 
conference; (2) any Government-owned or Government-operated 
facility; and (3) management units, such as National parks, 
National forests, fish hatcheries, wildlife refuges, research 
units, regional, State and other administrative units and the 
like, for which funds are provided in fiscal year 2005.
    The Committee emphasizes that any item for which a specific 
dollar amount is mentioned in any accompanying report, 
including all increases over the budget estimate approved by 
the Committee, shall be subject to a percentage reduction no 
greater or less than the percentage reduction applied to all 
domestic discretionary accounts.

                   Federal Funding of Indian Programs

    The Committee recommends appropriations of new budget 
authority aggregating $5.6 billion for Indian programs in 
fiscal year 2005. This is an increase of $62 million above the 
budget request and an increase of $166 million above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 2004. Spending for Indian services 
by the Federal Government in total is included in the following 
table.

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                       FY 2005
                                                   Approps bills             FY 2003      FY 2004       budget
                                                                              actual      enacted      request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Agriculture...............  (Agriculture)..................      740,299      802,084      796,874
Army Corps of Engineers.................  (Energy/Water).................       28,837       34,490       34,490
Department of Commerce..................  (C/J/S)........................       12,534       11,874       12,100
Department of Defense...................  (Defense)......................       18,000       18,000  ...........
Department of Education.................  (Labor/HHS/ED).................    2,195,514    2,387,557    2,494,007
Department of Health & Human Services...  (L/HHS/Interior)...............    4,053,406    4,200,904    4,301,607
Department of Housing & Urban             (VA/HUD).......................      726,250      733,545      672,036
 Development.
Department of the Interior..............  (Interior).....................    2,749,917    2,891,122    2,964,881
Department of Justice...................  (C/J/S)........................      251,194      220,079      227,158
Department of Labor.....................  (Labor/HHS/ED).................       70,553       69,602       70,015
Department of Transportation............  (Transportation)...............      239,438      274,547      329,548
Department of Veterans Affairs..........  (VA/HUD).......................          544          558          571
Environmental Protection Agency.........  (VA/HUD).......................      229,800      231,956      231,152
Small Business Administration...........  (C/J/S)........................        2,000        2,000  ...........
Smithsonian Institution.................  (Interior).....................       59,413       51,630       46,572
Department of the Treasury..............  (VA/HUD).......................        5,000        4,000        3,000
Other Agencies & Independent Agencies...  ...............................       97,724       96,758       43,039
                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      Grand Total.......................  ...............................   11,480,423   12,030,706   12,227,050
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Constitutional Authority

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

              Allocating Congressional Funding Priorities

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

                       FOCUSING ON CORE PROGRAMS

    The Committee's fiscal year 2005 budget recommendations 
reflect the necessity to stay within a constrained allocation 
in this time of conflict in Iraq and homeland security 
concerns. The recommendations are also sensitive to the need to 
address the deficit. The Committee's recommendations reflect 
the belief that: (1) proposed cuts to many core programs are 
unacceptable; (2) large increases for grant programs are 
unrealistic; (3) critical forest health programs and energy 
research must be continued; (4) untested and unproven grant 
programs and new land acquisition are a low priority; and (5) 
large, expensive partnership projects that have not been 
approved in advance by the Committee are unacceptable because 
they result in additional operational costs and displace 
critical backlog maintenance requirements.
    Wildfire management efforts and forest health programs are 
some of the most critically important core programs on which 
the Committee has focused scarce resources. The Committee 
recommendation increases funding for wildland fire management 
by $175 million above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level, 
including an increase of $58 million for hazardous fuels 
reduction. In addition, the Committee has maintained funding 
for critical and essential forest health management programs 
and for national fire plan support. Without these funds, we 
will not be able to protect communities and natural resources 
and we will have ever-increasing wildfire suppression costs in 
the future and the number and severity of large fire events 
will grow.
    Indian school and hospital and clinic construction funding 
is restored in the Committee's recommendations for fiscal year 
2005. We must maintain our commitments to American Indian and 
Alaska Natives and the construction of critically needed school 
and health facilities is central to our ability to meet those 
commitments.
    Absorption of costs associated with Federal pay increases, 
unreimbursed emergencies (including firefighting costs and 
costs associated with natural disasters), homeland security, 
rising energy prices and other unfunded fixed costs cannot 
continue indefinitely without further eroding core program 
capabilities. Over the past three years, the land management 
agencies in the Interior bill have absorbed nearly $800 million 
in unfunded costs and more than $400 million in unreimbursed 
firefighting costs. Over the same time period, Indian programs 
have absorbed over $500 million in unfunded costs. The 
Committee's fiscal year 2005 budget recommendations focus on 
adequately funding proven, successful, mission-essential 
Federal programs and reducing funding for large grant programs 
and new land acquisition.
    The Committee believes strongly that the agencies funded in 
the Interior and Related Agencies bill need to manage better 
the funds they have. Travel costs need to be closely monitored 
and controlled. The number, size, and cost of government-
sponsored conferences also should be reduced.
    The Committee expects the Departments and agencies funded 
in this bill to make maximum use of low cost airfares, 
consistent with General Services Administration guidelines. The 
GSA permits the use of lower fares, available to the general 
public, offered by non-contract carriers, if such use will 
result in a lower total trip cost. Consistent with GSA 
guidelines, the Committee expects each Department and agency to 
determine if such lower fares are available and, if so, those 
lower fares should be used unless the contract carrier that 
would have otherwise been used will provide a comparable fare. 
This direction applies to all official travel funded in this 
bill.
    Major new construction projects should not be initiated at 
the expense of critical operations and maintenance 
requirements. Likewise, no new construction project should be 
initiated without a thorough analysis of the future staffing, 
operations, and maintenance costs that will result, and the 
Committee should be consulted at the earliest possible stage 
when a major construction project is under consideration. This 
has been a particular problem in the National Park Service.
    The Committee appreciates the need for information 
technology improvements, enterprise services networks, and 
implementing portions of the President's management agenda. 
However, to date, a lot of funding has been dedicated to these 
initiatives without a well thought-out and reasonable approach 
to addressing requirements. Commercially available systems, 
through the private sector, should be used to the maximum 
extent possible rather than building customized new systems. 
Likewise, the Committee does not endorse the practice of 
assessing costs against programs to build bigger administrative 
bureaucracies in response to new administrative and technology 
requirements or the practice of reducing program budgets on the 
basis of presumed future savings. These costs should be clearly 
justified and requested under administrative accounts and any 
future savings associated with administrative improvements 
should be demonstrated before budget reductions are proposed. 
While portions of the Administration's management agenda may 
indeed be useful, funds should not be taken from all agencies 
to provide centralized funding for the various lead agencies. 
If funding is needed for government wide initiatives, it should 
be requested and managed by each lead agency.
    The Committee has made difficult choices in formulating its 
fiscal year 2005 budget recommendations. Each agency funded in 
the Interior and Related Agencies bill needs to examine 
carefully its way of doing business in these constrained fiscal 
times and focus on its core, proven programs and on better 
management of resources.

     ENERGY RESEARCH--ENSURING A BALANCED NATIONAL ENERGY STRATEGY

    The Committee again was disappointed by the emphasis in the 
budget request to fund major new long-term energy research 
efforts, such as FreedomCAR and FutureGen (the power plant of 
the future), at the expense of ongoing programs that will yield 
energy savings and emission reductions over the next ten years. 
While the Committee agrees that the Department of Energy needs 
to do a better job measuring program success and discontinuing 
programs that do not yield expected results, the elimination of 
promising, ongoing research efforts results in wasting the 
funds that have been invested in those efforts to date.
    The Committee believes that new programs should be 
considered, but promising research should also be continued and 
expanded if we are to achieve the goals of energy independence, 
dramatically lower energy consumption, and significantly 
reduced emissions of harmful pollutants from energy production 
and use. The Committee's recommendations present a balanced 
approach to handling the supply and demand sides of the energy 
issue and funding long-term research while continuing 
promising, ongoing shorter-term research.
    Incremental improvements to existing technology are 
critical to achieve short-term and mid-term energy efficiency 
improvements and emissions reductions. We cannot afford to 
abandon ongoing research in the hope that potential, cutting-
edge improvements can be achieved in the next 15 or 20 years. 
Indeed, the government's track record for picking ``winning'' 
technologies of the future has not been good. Too often new 
technologies have been pursued based on economic assumptions of 
their affordability that fail to materialize. Most major energy 
savings are achieved over time through improvements to existing 
technologies. This country and the world will rely on 
traditional sources of energy supply and current technology for 
at least the next 20 years. We cannot afford to back away from 
research on coal, oil, and natural gas while we look for 
alternative technologies.
    The Committee's recommendations acknowledge that we need 
both traditional fuels and alternative fuels and that we need 
to find ways to use all fuels and technologies more efficiently 
and more cleanly. To meet the ever-growing need for energy, 
domestically and worldwide, we are going to need to burn 
traditional fossil fuels more efficiently and with lower 
emissions. We need to expand our use of nuclear energy for 
electric power generation. We also should expand the use of 
alternative energy resources such as solar, wind, geothermal, 
and hydrogen. We will need all of these sources to meet demand.
    The Committee continues to support the President's clean 
coal power initiative, FutureGen initiative, and FreedomCAR 
initiative, albeit at lower funding levels for the latter two 
programs than in the budget request. The weatherization 
assistance program and State energy programs are funded at the 
fiscal year 2004 level even though energy programs as a whole 
in the bill are reduced by 7 percent.
    The Committee has recommended restoring many of the 
reductions proposed in the budget request for energy 
conservation research and for research to improve fossil energy 
technologies. It would be fiscally irresponsible to discontinue 
research in which we have made major investments without 
bringing that research to a logical conclusion.
    The Committee does not object to refocusing some existing 
programs if there is a rational, scientific basis for doing so. 
The Committee has continued funding for independent program 
reviews by the National Academy of Sciences to serve as that 
basis. In the meantime, we need to continue ongoing research if 
we are to have a balanced and effective national energy 
strategy.

                  TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


                       Bureau of Land Management

    The Bureau of Land Management is responsible for the 
multiple use management, protection, and development of a full 
range of natural resources, including minerals, timber, 
rangeland, fish and wildlife habitat, and wilderness on about 
261 million acres of the Nation's public lands and for 
management of 700 million additional acres of Federally-owned 
subsurface mineral rights. The Bureau is the second largest 
supplier of public outdoor recreation in the Western United 
States.
    Under the multiple-use and ecosystem management concept the 
Bureau administers more than 18,000 grazing permits and leases 
nearly 13 million livestock animal unit months on some 214 
million acres of public rangeland, and manages rangelands and 
facilities for 56,000 wild horses and burros, some 261 million 
acres of wildlife habitat, and over 117,000 miles of fisheries 
habitat. Grazing receipts are estimated to be about $13.2 
million in fiscal year 2005, the same as the estimate for 
fiscal year 2004 and actual receipts of $11.8 million in fiscal 
year 2003. The Bureau also administers about 55 million acres 
of commercial forests and woodlands through the ``Management of 
Lands and Resources'' and ``Oregon and California grant lands'' 
appropriations. Timber receipts (including salvage) are 
estimated to be $36.6 million in fiscal year 2005 compared to 
estimated receipts of $28.9 million in fiscal year 2004 and 
actual receipts of $13.5 million in fiscal year 2003. The 
Bureau has an active program of soil and watershed management 
on 175 million acres in the lower 48 States and 86 million 
acres in Alaska. Practices such as revegetation, protective 
fencing, and water development are designed to conserve, 
enhance, and develop public land, soil, and watershed 
resources. The Bureau is also responsible for fire protection 
on the public lands and on all Department of the Interior 
managed lands in Alaska, and for the suppression of wildfires 
on the public lands in Alaska and the western States.

                   MANAGEMENT OF LANDS AND RESOURCES




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $839,848,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       837,462,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       840,401,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +553,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        +2,939,000


    The Committee recommends $840,401,000 for management of 
lands and resources, an increase of $2,939,000 above the budget 
request and $553,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    Land Resources.--The Committee recommends $193,708,000 for 
land resources, $5,947,000 above the budget request and 
$10,573,000 above the 2004 enacted level. Changes from the 
budget request include increases of $3,947,000 to restore 
reductions taken for the wild horse and burro program, 
$1,000,000 for rangeland monitoring, and $1,000,000 for 
continuation of the San Pedro Partnership.
    The Committee is concerned about the management of wild 
horses and burros on public lands. The Bureau is requesting 
almost $40 million annually to manage over 36,000 wild horses 
and burros on public lands and to keep more than 25,000 in 
long-term holding facilities for the remainder of their life. 
Several times in previous fiscal years, the Administration has 
asked to reprogram funds for this program. Additionally, the 
Bureau's fiscal year 2005 budget request reduces almost every 
program within the Management of Lands and Resources activity 
to pay for an increase in this program. While the Bureau 
reports the increase to the wild horses and burro program as 
one of its highest priorities, it proposes to reduce funding in 
other programs to pay for the increase rather than requesting 
additional funds. The Committee has restored the funding to 
these other programs and provided the requested funding to 
manage the wild horse and burro program. The Committee urges 
the Bureau to investigate all available options for managing 
the number of wild horses and burros in their care and reducing 
the cost of the program. The Committee will not reprogram 
funding to this program at the expense of other ongoing 
programs in the Bureau.
    Wildlife and Fisheries.--The Committee recommends 
$38,087,000 for wildlife and fisheries, $203,000 above the 
budget request and $3,989,000 above the 2004 enacted level. 
Changes from the budget request include increases of $603,000 
to restore reductions taken for the wild horse and burro 
program, $500,000 for the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation, and reductions of $500,000 from the sagebrush 
conservation initiative and $400,000 from the Columbia River 
Salmon Recovery program.
    Threatened and Endangered Species.--The Committee 
recommends $22,028,000 for threatened and endangered species, 
$576,000 above the budget request and $88,000 above the 2004 
enacted level. The change to the budget request is to restore 
the reduction taken for the wild horse and burro program.
    Recreation Management.--The Committee recommends 
$62,525,000 for recreation management, $2,639,000 above the 
budget request and $249,000 above the 2004 enacted level. 
Changes from the budget request include increases of $1,039,000 
to restore reductions taken for the wild horse and burro 
program, and $1,600,000 for nationwide recreation management.
    The Committee is aware that the Bureau is considering 
implementing restrictions on landowner, inholder, and lessee 
access to and economic use of their property within the 
boundary of the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and 
Protection Area (CMPA). The Committee strongly urges the Bureau 
to comply with provisions in the Steens Act, which protect 
existing and historic access to, and economic use of, inholder 
properties within the CMPA. Unless and until funds for land 
acquisitions or exchanges in the Steens can be provided, 
landowners should be afforded full access to their properties.
    Energy and Minerals.--The Committee recommends $106,923,000 
for energy and minerals including Alaska minerals, $2,500,000 
above the budget request and $956,000 below the 2004 enacted 
level. Changes from the budget request include increases of 
$2,000,000 for Oil and Gas Management, $250,000 for Coal 
Management, and $250,000 for Other Mineral Resources to offset 
partially the cost recovery reductions proposed in the budget.
    The Committee is concerned that these cost recoveries will 
not be realized and will negatively impact these programs. The 
Committee has provided increases in prior years for processing 
applications for permits to drill on Federal lands, and is 
aware that some progress is being made. The Committee directs 
the Bureau to continue to streamline the permitting process and 
report quarterly on the number of permits issued.
    Realty and Ownership Management.--The Committee recommends 
$82,543,000 for realty and ownership management, $144,000 above 
the budget request and $10,703,000 below the 2004 enacted 
level. Changes from the budget request are to restore the 
reduction taken for the wild horse and burro program.
    Resource Protection and Maintenance.--The Committee 
recommends $83,087,000 for resource protection and maintenance, 
$1,909,000 above the budget request and $1,797,000 above the 
2004 enacted level. Changes from the request include increases 
of $1,309,000 to restore reductions for the wild horse and 
burro program, $600,000 general increase for additional law 
enforcement officers, 1,000,000 for California desert rangers, 
$1,000,000 to address public land degradation as a result of 
illegal immigration in Arizona, and a decrease of $2,000,000 
for monitoring.
    Transportation and Facilities Maintenance.--The Committee 
recommends $79,613,000 for transportation and facilities 
maintenance, $3,145,000 above the budget request and $1,920,000 
below the 2004 enacted level. Changes to the budget request 
include increases of $2,145,000 to restore reductions taken for 
the wild horse and burro program and $1,000,000 for 
infrastructure improvements for fish passage (culverts) on 
Bureau lands. The Committee's recommendation also shifts 
$29,052,000 from the infrastructure improvement program to the 
deferred maintenance management program. These two funding 
sources address identical project types and this will 
consolidate and streamline maintenance budget activities in the 
Bureau.
    Land and Resource Information Systems.--The Committee 
recommends $18,810,000 for land resource information systems, 
$493,000 above the budget request, and $53,000 above the 2004 
enacted level. The change to the budget request is to restore 
the reduction taken for the wild horse and burro program.
    Mining Law Administration.--The Committee recommends 
$32,696,000 for mining law administration. Offsetting fees are 
equal to the amount made available to support this activity.
    Workforce and Organizational Support.--The Committee 
recommends $143,345,000 for workforce and organizational 
support, $1,117,000 below the budget request and $6,280,000 
above the 2004 enacted level. Changes from the budget request 
include an increase of $244,000 to restore reductions taken for 
the wild horse and burro program and reductions of $583,000 for 
the e-government initiative, $570,000 for competitive sourcing 
activities, and $208,000 for Quickhire.
    Bill language is included in Title III--General Provisions 
concerning e-government initiatives and competitive sourcing 
studies.
    Challenge Cost Share.--The Committee recommends $7,500,000 
for challenge cost share, $13,500,000 below the budget request 
and $8,676,000 below the 2004 enacted level. Changes to the 
request include reductions of $11,000,000 for the department-
wide Challenge Cost Share program and $2,500,000 for the 
Bureau-managed Traditional Challenge Cost Share program. Funds 
for the Bureau-managed Challenge Cost Share program remain in 
the base at the fiscal year 2004 level for continuation of that 
program by the Bureau.

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $783,593,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       743,099,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       743,099,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -40,494,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $743,099,000 for wildland fire 
management, the same as the budget request and $40,494,000 
below the 2004 enacted level. After adjusting for supplemental 
appropriations provided during last year's fire season for 
wildland fire management, there is an increase of $57,922,000 
above the 2004 enacted level.
    The appropriation includes $262,644,000 for preparedness, 
$221,523,000 for fire suppression operations, $209,282,000 for 
hazardous fuels reduction, $24,276,000 for burned area 
rehabilitation, $5,000,000 for rural fire assistance, 
$12,374,000 for deferred maintenance and capital improvement 
and $8,000,000 for the joint fire science program.
    The Committee's recommendation includes an additional 
$100,000,000 in funding to provide additional resources for 
wildland fire suppression and to preclude borrowing funding 
from other ongoing Departmental programs to fight wildfires. 
These funds are included in Title IV of the bill.
    The Committee is concerned that the allocation of funds 
between preparedness and suppression operations may not 
maintain the levels of readiness needed for public safety that 
were established in fiscal years 2002 and 2003. The Committee 
believes that decisive action is necessary to manage escalating 
fire suppression costs. An important component of reducing such 
costs is maintaining initial attack capability so that more 
fires can be contained before they escape and cause serious 
loss of life and property as well as natural resource damage. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Department of the 
Interior to analyze current readiness levels to determine 
whether maintaining preparedness resources in the field at a 
level not less than that established in fiscal year 2003 will, 
based on the best information available, result in lower 
overall firefighting costs. If the Department makes such a 
determination, the Committee directs the Department to adjust 
the levels for preparedness and suppression funding accordingly 
and report on these adjustments to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations. The Department should advise the 
House and Senate Committees on appropriations in writing prior 
to its decision.
    The Committee has provided the requested funds for the 
hazardous fuels program but wants to ensure that these funds 
are used to address the highest priority fuels projects. The 
Committee expects the Department to provide a summary report on 
hazardous fuels projects planned for fiscal year 2005 including 
information on the major vegetative cover type and the type of 
treatment. In this report, the Department, in conjunction with 
the Forest Service, should detail the methods used to 
prioritize fuels projects. A common project prioritization 
method should be used by both departments to assure the 
American public that all funds, regardless of funding source, 
are used for the highest priority fuels reduction projects. The 
report should be delivered to the Committee by December 31, 
2004.
    Bill Language.--Language is included under the wildland 
fire management account allowing the Secretary of the Interior 
and the Secretary of Agriculture to transfer not more than 
$12,000,000 between the two Departments for wildland fire 
management programs and projects. Language is also included 
allowing the use of wildfire suppression funds in support of 
Federal emergency response actions.

                    CENTRAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $9,856,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         9,855,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         9,855,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................            -1,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Central Hazardous Materials Fund was established to 
include funding for remedial investigations/feasibility studies 
and cleanup of hazardous waste sites for which the Department 
of the Interior is liable pursuant to the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act and 
includes sums recovered from or paid by a party as 
reimbursement for remedial action or response activities.
    The Committee recommends $9,855,000, the same as the budget 
request and $1,000 below the 2004 enacted level for the central 
hazardous materials fund.
    The Committee does not approve the transfer of carryover 
balances to the Environmental Protection Agency for the Denver 
Radium site. Use of those carryover balances for the 
Department's financial management system replacement effort is 
addressed under the departmental management account.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $13,804,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         6,476,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        15,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +1,196,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        +8,524,000


    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for construction, 
$8,524,000 above the budget request and $1,196,000 above the 
2004 enacted level. The increase above the budget request is to 
address high priority deferred maintenance construction 
projects that improve recreation facilities and public access.
    The Committee directs the Bureau to provide a list of 
projects to be accomplished with the funding by December 31, 
2004. The Committee is concerned about the relatively low level 
of construction funding provided to the Bureau compared to 
other land management agencies and encourages the Department 
and the Administration to place more emphasis on providing 
adequate funding for large deferred maintenance construction 
projects on public lands managed by the Bureau.

                            LAND ACQUISITION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $18,370,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        24,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         4,500,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -13,870,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -19,500,000


    The Committee recommends $4,500,000 for land acquisition, a 
decrease of $19,500,000 below the budget request and 
$13,870,000 below the enacted level. This amount includes 
$1,000,000 for emergencies and hardships, $500,000 for land 
exchanges and $3,000,000 for acquisition management.
    Within available funds the agency should continue work on 
the Washington State land exchange.
    The Committee is concerned over the delay in the transfer 
of land at Fort Ord, California from the Department of the Army 
to the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. 
The Committee requests BLM to report back to the Committee 
within 60 days of enactment of this Act the exact remedial 
actions required to be completed at the Fort Ord site prior to 
final conveyance from the Army.

                   OREGON AND CALIFORNIA GRANT LANDS




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $105,357,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       116,058,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       111,557,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +6,200,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -4,501,000


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


    The Committee recommends $111,557,000 for the Oregon and 
California grant lands, $4,501,000 below the budget request and 
$6,200,000 above the 2004 enacted level. Changes to the budget 
request include reductions of $1,501,000 for forest management 
and $3,000,000 for resource management planning.

                           RANGE IMPROVEMENTS




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        10,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        10,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


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

               SERVICE CHARGES, DEPOSITS, AND FORFEITURES

    The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation 
estimated to be $24,490,000, the budget request, for service 
charges, deposits, and forfeitures. This appropriation is 
offset with fees collected under specified sections of the 
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and other Acts 
to pay for reasonable administrative and other costs in 
connection with rights-of-way applications from the private 
sector, miscellaneous cost-recoverable realty cases, timber 
contract expenses, repair of damaged lands, the adopt-a-horse 
program, and the provision of copies of official public land 
documents.

                       MISCELLANEOUS TRUST FUNDS




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $12,405,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        12,405,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        12,405,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


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

                United States Fish and Wildlife Service

    The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is to 
conserve, protect and enhance fish and wildlife and their 
habitats for the continuing benefit of people. The Service has 
responsibility for migratory birds, threatened and endangered 
species, certain marine mammals, and land under Service 
control.
    The Service manages nearly 96 million acres across the 
United States, encompassing a 544-unit National Wildlife Refuge 
System, additional wildlife and wetlands areas, and 69 National 
Fish Hatcheries. A network of law enforcement agents and port 
inspectors enforce Federal laws for the protection of fish and 
wildlife. In 2003, the Service celebrated the 100th anniversary 
of the establishment of the National Wildlife Refuge System.

                          RESOURCE MANAGEMENT




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $956,483,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       950,987,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       970,494,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       +14,011,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       +19,507,000


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


    The Committee recommends $970,494,000 for resource 
management, an increase of $19,507,000 above the budget request 
and $14,011,000 above the fiscal year 2004 level. Changes to 
the budget request are detailed below.
    Ecological Services.--The Committee recommends $244,840,000 
for ecological services, an increase of $7,817,000 above the 
budget request. The Committee has not agreed with the budget 
proposals to reduce dramatically or eliminate funding for 
certain candidate conservation, consultation, and recovery 
programs as outlined below.
    Increases for endangered species candidate conservation 
programs include $300,000 for Idaho sage grouse, $750,000 for 
Alaska sea otter, $50,000 for slickspot peppergrass, $100,000 
for Tahoe yellow cress, and $300,000 for the Fisher (Martes 
pennanti). There is a decrease in the listing program of 
$1,000,000 for critical habitat designation. There is an 
increase of $1,750,000 in consultation to restore partially the 
Natural Communities Conservation Planning program. Increases 
for recovery programs include $1,500,000 to restore the base 
program, $1,000,000 to restore the Platte River recovery 
program, $1,500,000 for wolf monitoring, $2,000,000 for Pacific 
salmon grants to be administered through the National Fish and 
Wildlife Foundation, $700,000 to restore the Upper Colorado 
River recovery program, and $200,000 for Florida manatee rescue 
and carcass salvage.
    In habitat conservation programs, there is a net decrease 
of $1,333,000. For the Partners for Fish and Wildlife program, 
there are increases of $2,000,000 for invasive species control 
(non-specific), $1,400,000 for Washington regional fisheries 
enhancement groups, $750,000 for the Walla Walla Basin HCP, 
$500,000 for Walla Walla Basin fish passage and salmon recovery 
efforts, $180,000 for technical assistance at the New Jersey 
Meadowlands; $800,000 for restoration in the Tunkhannock and 
Bowman's Creek watersheds in Pennsylvania, $1,000,000 for fish 
passage in the west branch of the Susquehanna River, $1,000,000 
for Georgia streambank restoration, and $700,000 for Willapa 
Bay spartina grass control. These increases are offset by 
decreases of $1,083,000 for Tamarisk control, $5,225,000 for 
the Upper Klamath Basin restoration program, and $4,000,000 for 
the High Plains partnership. In project planning, increases 
include $300,000 to restore the Metropolitan Greenspaces 
program, $170,000 to restore the base program, and $100,000 to 
continue operations at the Cedar City, UT ecological services 
office. In coastal programs there are increases of $175,000 for 
the Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group, $200,000 for Long Live 
the Kings, and $300,000 to restore funding for the Tampa and 
Florida panhandle field offices. These increases are offset 
partially by decreases of $400,000 for regional offices support 
and $200,000 for Washington office support.
    Refuges and Wildlife.--The Committee recommends 
$478,490,000 for refuges and wildlife, an increase of 
$2,820,000 above the budget request. In refuge operations and 
maintenance, there are increases of $700,000 to restore the 
Spartina grass control program at the Willapa NWR, WA, 
$2,000,000 for cooperative projects with friends groups on 
invasive species control, $1,000,000 to restore partially the 
invasive species program at Loxahatchee NWR, FL, $670,000 to 
restore the base operations program under the ``improve 
habitat'' subactivity, $2,000,000 to continue ``minimum 
staffing'' implementation, $100,000 for base funding for 
Caribbean NWRs, which have been adversely affected by the need 
to fund and staff the Vieques NWR, $2,000,000 to restore the 
visitor facilities enhancements program, and $1,900,000 to 
restore the base operations program under the ``visitor 
services'' subactivity. These increases are offset partially by 
decreases of $1,000,000 for invasive species strike teams and 
$7,600,000 for the Department-wide challenge cost share 
program. The funds for the Service-managed challenge cost share 
program remain in the base for continuation of that program by 
the Service.
    In migratory bird management, there is a decrease of 
1,000,000 for the joint ventures program. An increase of 
$201,000 above the fiscal year 2004 level remains in the budget 
for implementing the recommendations of the North American 
Waterfowl Management Plan.
    In law enforcement operations, increases include $250,000 
for operations at the Atlanta, GA port of entry, $450,000 for 
operations at the Louisville, KY port of entry, $450,000 for a 
general increase in law enforcement operations, and $900,000 to 
restore partially the law enforcement vehicle replacement 
program.
    Fisheries.--The Committee recommends $113,938,000 for 
fisheries, an increase of $10,140,000 above the budget request. 
There is an increase of $2,500,000 in hatchery maintenance to 
complete the Washington hatchery improvement program. The 
proposed decrease of $160,000 in hatchery operations base 
funding has been restored in the fish and wildlife assistance 
account for general program activities (see below) and is to be 
used for habitat restoration, consistent with the Committee's 
direction of the past several years to recover mitigation costs 
and use those funds to address habitat restoration.
    In fish and wildlife management, there is an increase of 
$100,000 to restore the anadromous fish management general 
program activities. For fish and wildlife assistance, increases 
include $200,000 to restore partially general program 
activities, $160,000 for habitat restoration as discussed 
above, $2,500,000 to restore the fish passage program, $180,000 
to restore the aquatic nuisance control program, $2,100,000 for 
Washington State salmon mass marking of hatchery fish, 
$1,000,000 to restore partially the whirling disease research 
program, and $500,000 to restore the Great Lakes fish and 
wildlife restoration program. There is also an increase of 
$900,000 to restore partially the marine mammals program.
    General Administration.--The Committee recommends 
$133,226,000 for general administration, a net decrease of 
$1,270,000 below the budget request. There is a decrease of 
$2,000,000 for the science excellence initiative. The Committee 
believes this initiative needs to be closely coordinated with, 
and jointly funded by, the U.S. Geological Survey. The 
Committee encourages the Department to facilitate this 
coordination and to request funding in both bureaus in fiscal 
year 2006 for this science initiative. There are also increases 
of $330,000 for the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and 
$400,000 for the wildlife without borders program within the 
international affairs budget.
    Bill Language.--The Committee recommends continuing bill 
language earmarking the Natural Communities Conservation 
Planning program. The amount for fiscal year 2005 is 
$1,750,000. For the endangered species listing program, 
$16,226,000 earmarked in bill language, of which $12,700,000 is 
earmarked for critical habitat designation.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Service should continue to modify its cost 
allocation methodology to ensure that costs are fairly assessed 
and cost containment is achieved to the maximum extent 
possible.
    2. The Service and the Department should not abandon their 
commitment to addressing the critical operations and 
maintenance backlog needs of the National Wildlife Refuge 
System now that the 100th anniversary of the refuge system has 
passed. The Service should update its minimum staffing 
analysis, which forms the basis for tier one of the Refuge 
Operating Needs System, no later than January 15, 2005.
    3. The Service's explanation for not having a backlog 
maintenance reduction initiative similar to that of the 
National Park Service is unacceptable. The Service's response 
to the Committee on this issue is that, since it has not 
completed all its comprehensive condition assessments, the 
amount of the maintenance backlog is ``tentative''. The 
Committee points out that the National Park Service backlog 
estimate is also ``tentative''.
    4. The Committee has added $1,000,000 for invasive species 
control at Loxahatchee NWR, FL. These funds, along with 
$5,000,000 provided in fiscal year 2004 should be sufficient 
for the first 2 years of a 5-year program to achieve 
``maintenance control'' of invasive species on the refuge. The 
remaining 3 years of the program will require $3,000,000 per 
year and the Service should budget for those funds in fiscal 
years 2006, 2007, and 2008.
    5. The Louisville, KY airport port of entry is funded for 
continued operation, as are the Tampa and Florida Panhandle 
offices in the coastal program. The Service's budget has been 
consistently wrong-minded in ignoring the funding needs for 
continued operations of existing offices in order to fund new 
and expanded initiatives. The Committee strongly encourages the 
Service and the Department to discontinue this practice in the 
future.
    6. The Peregrine Fund should be funded at $400,000 in 
fiscal year 2005.
    7. The Service should maximize the use of non-Federal 
employees for joint venture coordinators and assistant 
coordinators in the migratory bird program.
    8. The Service should review the fisheries budget 
structure, in the context of the new fisheries strategic plan. 
Improvements to the budget structure should be made to 
implement more efficiently the strategic plan and to track 
performance against that plan. Particular consideration should 
be given to combining anadromous fish management and fish and 
wildlife assistance.
    9. The Service should continue and intensify its efforts to 
collect reimbursements for fisheries mitigation efforts and use 
those funds to address habitat restoration and conservation. 
Funds should not be deducted from the Service's budget on the 
hope of getting reimbursement from others. The fisheries 
program's ability to address mission essential work and to 
maintain its infrastructure is severely limited by the amount 
of funding and staffing that is being dedicated to mitigation 
work for others. The Service needs to pay more attention to 
habitat restoration. The Committee expects the funds from 
reimbursements for mitigation to be used for this purpose and 
for other mission-essential fisheries work.
    10. The Service should not raise fish for Bureau of 
Reclamation mitigation at the Hotchkiss National Fish Hatchery 
unless it is provided funding from BOR adequate to support that 
activity.
    11. The Committee has recommended bill language, in Title 
III--General Provisions, prohibiting the use of funds for 
Safecom, Disaster Management, E-Training, and E-Rulemaking 
activities. Funds requested for these activities should be 
reprogrammed to cover equitably fixed cost increases not funded 
in the budget request.
    12. The Committee notes the enactment of the Captive 
Wildlife Safety Act and encourages the Service to develop a 
plan to implement the Act and to request funding in fiscal year 
2006 for that purpose.
    13. The Navy transferred land on Vieques, Puerto Rico to 
the Service for a National Wildlife Refuge and funding is 
provided for operation of that refuge. The National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration has experience in the protection and 
restoration of trust resources and has also successfully 
conducted large-scale remediation projects at other sites, 
including the Pribilof Islands, Alaska. The Service should 
consult with NOAA and, as appropriate, enter into memoranda of 
understanding to make use of NOAA's expertise and experience in 
fulfilling its responsibilities on Vieques NWR.
    14. In the past, the Service has achieved cost savings and 
efficiency improvements by consolidating the management of 
certain refuges within the National Wildlife Refuge System. 
There are three major refuges in Arkansas, the White River, the 
Cache River, and the Bald Knob National Wildlife Refuges, that 
are in close proximity of each other. These refuges suffer from 
inadequate staffing and maintenance funding. The Committee 
believes that, to ensure cost effective and consistent 
management practices within the refuge system in Arkansas, the 
Service should examine the feasibility of consolidating these 
three refuges under the management of the White River National 
Wildlife Refuge. The Service should report within 120 days of 
enactment of this Act on the benefits that would result from 
such a consolidation.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $59,808,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        22,111,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        48,400,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -11,408,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       +26,289,000


    The Committee recommends $48,400,000 for construction, a 
decrease of $11,408,000 below the fiscal year 2004 level and an 
increase of $26,289,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
funds:

                                             [Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Budget     Cmte.
                   Project                                Description             request      rec.      Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arapaho NWR, CO..............................  Muskrat Dam [p/d/cc]............       $800       $800  .........
Atchafalaya NWR, LA..........................  Bridge repairs/improvements.....  .........        300       $300
Big Branch Marsh NWR, LA.....................  Storage facility................  .........        285        285
Clark R. Bavin Forensics Laboratory, OR......  Renovation/upgrade facility [cc]  .........      6,682      6,682
Craig Brook NFH, ME..........................  Wastewater Treatment Compliance--     1,950      1,950  .........
                                                Phase II [d/icl].
Eastern MA NWR Complex, MA (Great Meadows)...  Visitors Center and                       -      3,177      3,177
                                                Administration Building (#3 on
                                                priority list) [p/d/c].
Fish Springs NWR, UT.........................  Seismic Safety Rehabilitation of        115        115  .........
                                                Six Buildings--Phase I [p/d].
Green Lake NFH, ME...........................  Wastewater Treatment Compliance--       658        658  .........
                                                Phase I [p/d].
Kenai NWR, AK................................  Visitors Center (#2 on priority   .........        883        883
                                                list) [p/d].
King Salmon FWS Administrative Site, AK......  Seismic Safety Rehabilitation of         65         65  .........
                                                Office/Storage Building--Phase
                                                I [p/d].
Klamath Basin NWR Complex, CA................  Water Supply and Management--         1,000      1,000  .........
                                                Phase V [c].
Lacreek NWR, SD..............................  Little White River Dam--Phase         4,200      4,200  .........
                                                III [cc].
Midway Atoll NWR.............................  Electrical system replacement...  .........      2,700      2,700
Midway Atoll NWR.............................  Replace wastewater treatment      .........        500        500
                                                system w/septic fields.
Northeast Fishery Center, PA.................  Raceway rehabilitation and tank   .........        795        795
                                                installation.
Northwest Power Planning Area................  Fish screens etc................  .........      3,000      3,000
Office of Aircraft Services (MBS Programs)...  Replacement of Survey Aircraft--      1,000      1,000  .........
                                                Phase II.
Pocosin Lakes NWR, NC........................  Center for the Sounds expansion   .........      1,000      1,000
                                                and exhibits.
Servicewide..................................  Bridge Safety Inspections.......        575        575  .........
Servicewide..................................  Dam Safety Programs &                   730        730  .........
                                                Inspections.
Servicewide..................................  Visitor Contact Facilities......  .........      5,000      5,000
Servicewide..................................  Field and laboratory testing of   .........        300        300
                                                fishway designs.
Tualatin NWR, OR.............................  Visitors Center and               .........      1,667      1,667
                                                Administration Building (#1 on
                                                priority list) [p/d].
                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Line Item Construction.......  ................................     11,093     37,382     26,289
                                              ==================================================================
Nationwide Engineering Services:.............  ................................
    Cost Allocation Methodology..............  ................................      3,151      3,151  .........
    Environmental Compliance.................  ................................      1,400      1,400  .........
    Other, non-project specific Nationwide     ................................      6,117      6,117  .........
     Engineering Services.
    Seismic Safety Program...................  ................................        200        200  .........
    Waste Prevention, Recycling Environmental  ................................        150        150  .........
     Management.
                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Nationwide Engineering         ................................     11,018     11,018  .........
       Services.
                                              ==================================================================
      Total..................................  ................................     22,111     48,400     26,289
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Service should continue to use a standardized design 
approach for visitors centers and should request funding for 
visitors centers on the priority list. The Committee has 
provided some funding for the first 3 projects on the priority 
list.
    2. Funding is included for infrastructure improvements at 
Midway Atoll NWR, including replacement of the electrical 
system and replacement of the current wastewater treatment 
system with septic fields. These improvements will 
significantly reduce the cost of operations at Midway, 
including the cost of airport operations. The Service should 
work with the Federal Aviation Administration to leverage FAA 
funds for completion of these important projects and for fuel 
farm improvements.

                            LAND ACQUISITION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $43,091,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        45,041,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        12,500,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -30,591,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -32,541,000


    The Committee recommends $12,500,000 for land acquisition, 
a decrease of $32,541,000 below the budget request and 
$30,591,000 below the enacted level. This amount includes 
$1,000,000 for inholdings, $1,000,000 for emergencies and 
hardships, $500,000 for exchanges, $2,000,000 for cost 
allocation methodology, and $8,000,000 for acquisition 
management.

                      LANDOWNER INCENTIVE PROGRAM

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $29,630,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        50,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        15,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -14,630,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -35,000,000


    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the landowner 
incentive program, a decrease of $14,630,000 below the fiscal 
year 2004 level and $35,00,000 below the budget request.
    Given the constrained allocation for fiscal year 2005, the 
Committee has focused restoring funding on the core, proven, 
mission-essential programs of the Service. The Committee does 
not object to new programs, but these grant programs should 
only be funded in addition to, and not at the expense of, 
mission-essential programs including proven, cost-shared, 
partnership programs. The Committee recommendations address 
restoring funding for the critical operational needs in the 
National Wildlife Refuge System and the fisheries program and 
provide some modest increases for successful and highly 
leveraged partnership programs such as the coastal program, the 
joint ventures program, and the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation.

                       PRIVATE STEWARDSHIP GRANTS

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $7,408,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        10,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         5,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        -2,408,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -5,000,000


    The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for private stewardship 
grants, a decrease of $2,408,000 below the fiscal year 2004 
level and $5,000,000 below the budget request.
    Bill language is included providing for the merger of funds 
from the former ``Stewardship Grants'' account with funds in 
this account.

            COOPERATIVE ENDANGERED SPECIES CONSERVATION FUND

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $81,596,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        90,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        81,596,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -8,404,000


    The Committee recommends $81,596,000, the fiscal year 2004 
funding level, for the cooperative endangered species 
conservation fund, a decrease of $8,404,000 below the budget 
request.
    Bill language is recommended deriving only the HCP land 
acquisition portion of this account from the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund, instead of deriving the entire funding from 
the LWCF as proposed in the budget request.

                     NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE FUND

    Through this program the Service makes payments to counties 
in which Service lands are located, based on their fair market 
value. Payments to counties are estimated to be $17,814,000 in 
fiscal year 2005 with $14,414,000 derived from this 
appropriation and $3,400,000 from net refuge receipts estimated 
to be collected in fiscal year 2004.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $14,237,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        14,414,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        14,414,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +177,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $14,414,000, the budget request, 
for the National wildlife refuge fund, an increase of $177,000 
above the fiscal year 2004 funding level.

               NORTH AMERICAN WETLANDS CONSERVATION FUND

    The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, through the North 
American Wetlands Conservation Fund, leverages partner 
contributions for wetlands conservation. Projects to date have 
been in 50 States, 13 Canadian provinces, 25 Mexican states, 
and the U.S. Virgin Islands. In addition to this appropriation, 
the Service receives funding from receipts in the Federal Aid 
in Wildlife Restoration account from taxes on firearms, 
ammunition, archery equipment, pistols, and revolvers, and from 
the Sport Fish Restoration account from taxes on fishing tackle 
and equipment, electric trolling motors and fish finders, and 
certain marine gasoline taxes. By law, sport fish restoration 
receipts are used for coastal wetlands in States bordering the 
Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, States bordering the Great Lakes, 
Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, the Commonwealth of the 
Northern Mariana Islands, the freely associated States in the 
Pacific, and American Samoa.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $37,531,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        54,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        38,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +469,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -16,000,000


    The Committee recommends $38,000,000 for the North American 
wetlands conservation fund, a decrease of $16,000,000 below the 
budget request and $469,000 above the fiscal year 2004 level. 
Decreases to the budget request include $15,360,000 for 
wetlands conservation grants and $640,000 for program 
administration.

                NEOTROPICAL MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $3,951,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................                 0
Recommended, 2005.....................................         4,400,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +449,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        +4,400,000


    The Committee recommends $4,400,000 for the neotropical 
migratory bird conservation program, an increase of $4,400,000 
above the budget request and $449,000 above the fiscal year 
2004 level. The Administration proposed $4,000,000 for this 
program as part of the multinational species conservation fund.
    This program provides critically needed resources for 
conservation of neotropical migratory birds. The Committee 
expects the Service to coordinate closely with the Service's 
international program on neotropical migratory bird 
conservation program implementation.

                MULTINATIONAL SPECIES CONSERVATION FUND

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $5,532,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         9,500,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         5,900,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +368,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -3,600,000


    The Committee recommends $5,900,000 for the multinational 
species conservation fund, an increase of $368,000 above the 
fiscal year 2004 level and $3,600,000 below the budget request. 
Changes to the budget request include a decrease of $4,000,000 
for neotropical migratory birds (which is funded in a separate 
account) and an increase of $100,000 each for African elephant 
conservation, Asian elephant conservation, great ape 
conservation, and rhinoceros and tiger conservation. The 
Committee expects these funds to be matched by non-Federal 
funding to leverage private contributions to the maximum extent 
possible.

                    STATE AND TRIBAL WILDLIFE GRANTS

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $69,138,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        80,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        67,500,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        -1,638,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -12,500,000


    The Committee recommends $67,500,000 for State and tribal 
wildlife grants, a decrease of $1,638,000 below the fiscal year 
2004 level and $12,500,000 below the budget request. Within the 
amount provided, $6,000,000 is for competitively awarded grants 
to Indian tribes.
    Each State or eligible entity has two years to enter into 
specific grant agreements with the Service using fiscal year 
2005 funding. If funds remain unobligated at the end of fiscal 
year 2006, the unobligated funds will be reapportioned to all 
States and eligible entities, together with any new 
appropriations provided in fiscal year 2007.
    Not more than 3 percent of the appropriated amount may be 
used for Federal administration of the program. Administrative 
costs for each grantee should also be held to a minimum so that 
the maximum amount of funding is used for on-the-ground 
projects.
    Funds made available under this account should be added to 
revenues from existing State sources and not serve as a 
substitute for revenues from such sources.
    Priority for the use of these funds should be placed on 
those species with the greatest conservation need. Funds should 
be used to address the life needs and habitat requirements of 
those species in order to preclude the need to list them as 
threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act.
    The Committee expects each State and other participating 
entity in the formula grant program to submit its comprehensive 
wildlife conservation plan on time. The Service should notify 
each State or other entity as soon as possible after receipt of 
its plan if the plan is approved, conditionally approved, or 
disapproved. If a plan is conditionally approved, the 
submitting entity should be given a limited but reasonable 
amount of time to address the Service's concerns and submit a 
revised plan for approval. The Committee suggests that such 
extension of time should not exceed 6 months. If a plan is 
disapproved, the submitting entity is no longer entitled to 
receive funds from the program. Should an entity with a 
disapproved plan elect to submit a revised plan in the future, 
it may do so but, until a plan is approved, that entity will 
not be entitled to receive any funds from the program.

                         National Park Service

    The mission of the National Park Service is to preserve 
unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the 
national park system for the enjoyment, education, and 
inspiration of this and future generations. The National Park 
Service cooperates with partners to extend the benefits of 
natural and cultural resource conservation and outdoor 
recreation throughout this country and the world.
    The National Park Service, established in 1916, has 
stewardship responsibilities for the protection and 
preservation of the heritage resources of the national park 
system. The system, consisting of 388 separate and distinct 
units, is recognized globally as a leader in park management 
and resource preservation. The national park system represents 
much of the finest the Nation has to offer in terms of scenery, 
historical and archeological relics, and cultural heritage. 
Through its varied sites, the National Park Service attempts to 
explain America's history, interpret its culture, preserve 
examples of its natural ecosystems, and provide recreational 
and educational opportunities for U.S. citizens and visitors 
from all over the world. In addition, the National Park Service 
provides support to tribal, local, and State governments to 
preserve culturally significant, ecologically important, and 
public recreational lands.

                 OPERATION OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................    $1,609,560,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................     1,686,067,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................     1,686,067,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       +76,507,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $1,686,067,000 for operation of 
the National Park System, the same as the budget request and an 
increase of $76,507,000 above the enacted level. The Committee 
has redirected increases in the budget request in order to 
provide an additional $32,654,000 for across the board park 
base increases. Combined with $22,012,000 in specific park 
operating increases in the budget request, the parks will have 
an additional $54,666,000 for fiscal year 2005. This means that 
park units will have $1.02 billion available for park 
operations in fiscal year 2005.
    For three years, the Committee has been concerned about the 
absorption of pay costs, storm damage, anti-terrorism 
requirements, competitive sourcing activities and other 
mandates from the Department and the Office of Management and 
Budget for which funds have not been provided, or provided at 
the expense of core operating programs. This has begun to have 
a major impact of the parks' ability to operate, despite the 
$500,000,000 in additional operating funds provided by the 
Committee over the last ten years. The Committee understands 
the need for fiscal constraint during times of war and high 
deficits, however, that can be accomplished by focusing limited 
resources on basic operational needs and core programs--not by 
creating new initiatives and expanding non-essential programs.
    The Committee has reviewed the park increase priorities 
submitted in the budget for fiscal year 2005 and again finds 
the emphasis placed on expanding law enforcement and 
maintenance programs. The Congress has already provided 
increases to enhance law enforcement presence at the icon and 
border parks and has invested more funds each year for 
maintenance of Service facilities than any period in the past. 
The Service's budget requests cannot continue to be limited to 
a few parks and purposes while not providing funds to maintain 
visitor access and services in parks across the system.
    Resource Stewardship.--The Committee recommends 
$343,467,000 for resource stewardship, an increase of 
$8,161,000 above the enacted level and the same as the budget 
request. Included in this amount are increases above the 
enacted level of $2,182,000 for specific park base increases, 
$4,111,000 for inventory and monitoring, and $528,000 to 
monitor water quality in parks. The Committee accepts the 
following reductions detailed in the budget: $700,000 for fleet 
management and $223,000 for the Cumberland Piedmont Learning 
Center. Also included is $2,263,000 for uncontrollable 
expenses.
    Visitor Services.--The Committee recommends $326,856,000 
for visitor services, an increase of $7,093,000 above the 
enacted level and a decrease of $3,400,000 below the budget 
request. Included in this amount are increases above the 
enacted level of $5,758,000 for specific park base increases, 
$1,000,000 for the Presidential Inaugural and $300,000 for law 
enforcement at headquarters. Decreases to the request include 
$1,200,000 for regional field criminal investigations and 
$2,200,000 for a new law enforcement pilot program (IMARS). The 
Committee accepts the following reductions detailed in the 
budget, $200,000 for fleet management reform and $1,000,000 for 
publication streamlining. Also included is $1,235,000 for 
uncontrollable expenses.
    Maintenance.--The Committee recommends $573,178,000 for 
maintenance, an increase of $13,967,000 above the enacted level 
and a reduction of $12,915,000 below the budget request. This 
reduction was done in order to provide additional operating 
funds for the parks and because the service has had difficulty 
obligating the funds. Included in this amount are increases 
above the enacted level of $11,106,000 for specific park base 
increases and $2,017,000 for condition assessments. Decreases 
to the request include $8,165,000 for repair and 
rehabilitation, $3,000,000 for the removal of hazardous 
structures and $1,750,000 for general maintenance. The 
Committee accepts the following reductions detailed in the 
budget, $400,000 for fleet management reform and $1,000,000 for 
central sign program savings. Also included is $2,244,000 for 
uncontrollable expenses.
    Within the amounts available for repair and rehabilitation, 
$450,000 is for the rehabilitation of 26 Williams Street in 
Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, $306,000 is 
for rehabilitation of restrooms at Porter Beach in Indiana 
Dunes National Lakeshore, $500,000 is for boat launch ramps at 
Lake Mead National Recreation Area, $300,000 is for signage 
repairs at Ft. Stanwix National Monument, $388,000 is for dock, 
signage and lighting repairs at Amistad National Recreation 
Area, and $300,000 is to continue the cultural landscaping 
improvements at Gettysburg NMP.
    Park Support.--The Committee recommends $284,231,000 for 
park support, an increase of $1,902,000 above the enacted level 
and a reduction of $16,339,000 from the budget request. 
Included in this amount are increases above the enacted level 
of $2,966,000 for specific park base increases, $1,200,000 for 
IT security infrastructure, $1,571,000 for IT certification and 
accreditation, $750,000 for IT enterprise architecture, 
$1,200,000 enterprise services network, $980,000 for annual 
financial audits, and $970,000 for competitive sourcing 
activities. Decreases to the request include $871,000 for E-gov 
initiatives, $500,000 for management accountability review, 
$250,000 for VIP regional coordinators, $94,000 for Lewis and 
Clark, $600,000 for expansion of the VIP senior ranger program, 
$2,028,000 for regular challenge cost share program, $4,125,000 
that represents the proposed increase to the Departmentwide 
Challenge Cost Share program, and $7,871,000 in base funding 
for the Department-wide Challenge Cost Share program. The 
Committee has retained base funding for the long-standing, 
Service-managed challenge cost share program. Also included is 
$2,654,000 for uncontrollable expenses. The Committee accepts 
the programmatic decreases proposed in the budget.
    The Committee expects the Service to continue to allocate 
one-third of the funds provided for the challenge cost share 
program to the National Trails System.
    External Administrative Costs.--The Committee recommends 
$125,681,000 for external administrative costs, an increase of 
$12,730,000 above the enacted level and the same as the budget 
request. Included in this amount are increases above the 
enacted level of $13,180,000 for uncontrollable expenses. The 
Committee accepts the following reduction of $450,000 for 
central office streamlining. The budget request did not include 
programmatic increases for this account.
    The Committee continues to support the decision by Ozark 
National Scenic Riverways to retain the carpentry and 
maintenance positions at the park. The Committee recognizes the 
urgent needs at ONSR for key carpentry and maintenance 
personnel who have specialized skills in properly maintaining 
park facilities. The Committee expects that these carpentry and 
maintenance positions will be retained.
    Everglades Science.--In 2003, the National Academy of 
Sciences (NAS) and the General Accounting Office (GAO) issued 
reports recommending numerous management improvements for the 
National Park Service and the United States Geological Survey 
science programs supporting the Everglades restoration effort. 
Although noting the importance of science to the restoration 
effort, the NAS and GAO each recommended improved coordination 
of the Department's scientific programs to ensure that gaps in 
scientific understanding are filled and that science is 
synthesized and integrated into the decision-making process. 
Absent such improvements, the NAS and GAO raised the prospect 
that the Everglades restoration effort, which relies heavily on 
adaptive management to deal with technological uncertainty, 
could fail to achieve its restoration goals. Such failure would 
jeopardize the sustainability of the national parks and 
national wildlife refuges located in South Florida and risk the 
significant federal investment that is being made to restore 
and protect these national resources.
    In response to these reports, the Committee held an 
oversight hearing on the Department's science programs. At that 
hearing the Department testified that it would develop a 
Science Plan by May 2003 to support the research requirements 
of the land management agencies involved in the restoration 
effort. The Department also testified that it would improve 
internal coordination of scientific research within the 
National Park Service and the U.S. Geological Survey. Despite 
these commitments, the Committee remains concerned that little 
is being done. Although the Department recently submitted its 
Science Plan--one year later than promised--it is not clear 
that improvements in internal coordination have occurred or 
that the research is supporting the decisions that are being 
made. If the Department wishes to retain the support of the 
Committee for its science programs that support the restoration 
effort, it is imperative that the Department manage these 
programs to ensure that the scientific research needs of the 
land management agencies involved in the Everglades restoration 
effort are being met. Accordingly, the Committee directs the 
Department to submit a report by November 15, 2004, describing 
the scientific research projects to be funded in the National 
Park Service and the U.S. Geological Survey with the fiscal 
year 2005 appropriation. The report should provide details for 
each research project, including how each research project is 
consistent with the Department's Science Plan; how each 
research project is filling gaps in scientific information; and 
the importance of each research project to the decisions that 
need to be made. Additionally, the Committee directs the 
Department to provide a status report on the actions taken to 
implement the recommendations of the NAS and the GAO.
    National Park Foundation.--The Committee has noted a 
strained relationship between the National Park Service and the 
National Park Foundation. This has occurred at both the 
national and park levels. The Committee requested that the 
General Accounting Office (GAO) review continuing concerns 
within the National Park Service that the Foundation is not 
supporting its priority needs. The Committee had additional 
concerns and requested information on the following areas: (1) 
the Foundation's roles and responsibilities for raising funds 
to support the Park Service, (2) the amount and kinds of 
donations raised, and (3) the extent to which the contributions 
obtained by the Foundation assist the Service in addressing 
park priorities. Other issues were also addressed.
    The GAO concluded that although the Foundation has more 
than doubled donations of money and in-kind contributions from 
1999 levels, many National Park Service officials question the 
use of Foundation donations and believe support should be 
directed more toward park priorities. A majority of the 
donations are restricted by donors and most corporate dollars 
are non-cash or in-kind services. The GAO concluded that the 
Foundation's efforts to assist the Service are hampered by poor 
communication and documentation problems.
    Major factors that contribute to these problems include: 
(1) the Foundation and the Service do not have a comprehensive 
written agreement that clearly describes the Foundation's 
fundraising strategy and clarifies roles and responsibilities 
for each partner, (2) the Foundation and the Service enter into 
verbal rather than written fund-raising agreement, thereby 
making it impossible to determine whether commitments were met, 
and (3) Foundation and Service officials continually disagree 
about the fund-raising strategy as well as the objectives for 
one of the Foundation's key programs.
    The Committee directs that the Service and the Foundation 
implement all of the specific recommendations identified in the 
GAO report as detailed on pages 22 and 23 of the report. There 
are specific actions to be taken by the Service and the 
Foundation. Some of the major recommendations include:
    1. Enter into an overall written fundraising agreement that 
describes the Service's and the Foundation's fundraising 
strategy; the roles and responsibilities of the Service and the 
Foundation including headquarters, regions, and parks; and a 
process for the annual identification of a list of the 
Service's overall needs and park-specific needs and the 
Foundation's philanthropic opportunities. This overarching 
agreement, including a strategy and priorities for fundraising, 
is to be submitted to the Committee within 60 days of enactment 
of this Act. In addition, the Service and the Foundation should 
submit a cooperatively developed report to the Committee in 
January of each year on specific park priorities and goals for 
that year and a cooperatively developed report by December 15 
each year detailing actual accomplishments.
    2. Immediately enter into written fundraising agreements 
and plans for all ongoing and future fundraising efforts. All 
individual agreements are to be forwarded to the Committee.
    3. The Service should submit a report twice a year in April 
and December detailing all cooperative agreements and any 
movement of funds from the Service to the Foundation and 
describe what services were requested and provided.
    4. Ensure that the funds and services secured through the 
Proud Partner program, and any new initiative approved by the 
Service and the Foundation meet park specific needs.
    Travel.--The Committee notes that the Service has made 
efforts this year to reduce non-essential travel. Given the 
continuing tight fiscal constraints on domestic discretionary 
spending, and the shortage of park operating dollars, the 
Committee continues to urge the Service to approve only 
essential domestic travel and use alternatives such as 
teleconferencing to accomplish the Service's mission when 
possible. This directive particularly applies to the 
Washington, D.C. and Regional Offices. Foreign travel is 
strongly discouraged. The Committee requests that the Director 
submit all requests for foreign travel to the Committee prior 
to approval. In addition, the Service should limit the number 
and size of national conferences and regional meetings.
    Setting Priorities.--The Committee's goal is to maintain 
our national parks in good condition and have them accessible 
by the American public. The Committee recognizes that many 
programs compete for funding in the National Park Service, 
which makes it increasingly important to have an effective 
system for setting budget priorities. Priority-setting and 
strategic planning are critical, given the constraints on 
federal domestic spending.
    This Committee has provided an additional $500 million in 
operating increases over the past ten years, yet the Service 
indicates that there are severe operational shortfalls. The 
Committee has provided the Service with the Recreation Fee 
Demonstration program, which has brought in an additional 
revenue stream amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars 
dedicated to relieving the backlog maintenance needs of the 
parks. In addition, the Committee has tripled the funding for 
the repair and rehabilitation account and focused the line item 
construction program on backlog maintenance requirements for 
the last eight years. The Committee has also provided over $80 
million in recent years for a new natural resource challenge 
program. Despite all of these funding increases, the parks 
continue to announce reduced hours and services.
    The Committee is concerned that the Service does not have a 
priority system in place and operating. While the Committee 
acknowledges that the Service has had to absorb significant 
costs for the past several years, it believes that the Service 
fails to recognize that all of its various program ``wishes'' 
cannot be met. Leadership must focus on resolving the most 
pressing needs and resist the temptation to initiate new 
programs, such as a major educational initiative, at a time of 
constrained resources.
    In addition, the Committee is concerned about the emergence 
of large, expensive partnership construction projects, most of 
which do not have Committee approval. As referenced in the 
construction account, there are currently over 100 projects, 
with a potential cost to the Committee in excess of $300 
million. Without question, funding these projects would have a 
profound effect on park operations as well as backlog 
maintenance needs.
    Therefore, the Committee believes this situation needs to 
be addressed immediately and directs the Service to contract 
with the National Academy of Public Administration for a 
comprehensive review of its priority-setting and strategic 
planning processes. Funding should be provided with savings 
from reduced travel and conferences.

                       UNITED STATES PARK POLICE




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $77,888,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        81,204,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        81,204,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +3,316,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $81,204,000 for the U.S. Park 
Police, an increase of $3,316,000 above the enacted level and 
the same as the budget request.
    The Committee continues to be disappointed over the long 
delay in resolving the fiscal and management problems of the 
U.S. Park Police. The first phase of the second report of the 
National Academy of Public Administration, issued February 
2004, documents that while some minor recommendations have been 
implemented, the balance have either been only partially 
implemented or not addressed at all.
    The Committee holds the Park Service responsible for not 
managing this problem, and urges the Service and the 
Department, in the strongest of terms, to deal with these 
issues before the end of calendar year 2004.

                  NATIONAL RECREATION AND PRESERVATION

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $61,776,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        37,736,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        53,877,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        -7,899,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       +16,141,000


    The Committee recommends $53,877,000 for national 
recreation and preservation, an increase of $16,141,000 above 
the request and a decrease of $7,899,000 below the enacted 
level.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimate by activity are shown in the following table:


    Recreation Programs.--The Committee recommends $551,000 for 
recreation programs, the same as the budget request and an 
increase of $3,000 above the enacted level. The increase above 
the enacted level is for uncontrollable expenses.
    Natural Programs.--The Committee recommends $10,718,000 for 
natural programs, a decrease of $157,000 below the enacted 
level and $248,000 below the budget request. The decrease below 
the budget request is for the Rivers and Trails technical 
assistance program.
    The Committee appreciates the cooperation of the leadership 
of the National Park Service in implementing reforms to the 
Rivers and Trails Technical Assistance Program articulated in 
the Committee's surveys and investigative report dated October 
2003. The Committee understands that there is an effort 
underway to update a strategic plan for the program. However, 
the Committee is concerned that program managers continue to 
resist these reforms. Until such time as the Committee is 
convinced that reforms have been implemented fully, the bill 
restrictions regarding cooperative agreements and contracts 
will be retained.
    Cultural Programs.--The Committee recommends $19,814,000 
for cultural programs, an increase of $124,000 above the 
enacted level and the same as the budget request. The increase 
above the enacted level is for uncontrollable expenses. Within 
available funds, $300,000 is provided for Heritage 
Preservation, Inc., and $250,000 to continue the Louisiana 
Heritage Education Model at the National Center Preservation 
Technology Training located in Natchitoches, Louisiana.
    International Park Affairs.--The Committee recommends 
$1,616,000 for international park affairs, an increase of 
$11,000 above the enacted level and the same as the budget 
request. The increase above the enacted level is for 
uncontrollable expenses.
    Environmental and Compliance Review.--The Committee 
recommends $397,000 for environmental and compliance review, an 
increase of $1,000 above the enacted level and the same as the 
budget request.
    Grant Administration.--The Committee recommends $1,892,000 
for grant administration, an increase of $316,000 above the 
enacted level and the same as the budget request. The increase 
above the enacted level is for uncontrollable expenses and 
reflects the transfer of urban park grant administration.
    Heritage Partnership Program.--The Committee recommends 
$15,095,000 for the heritage partnership program, an increase 
of $821,000 above the enacted level and an increase of 
$12,595,000 above the budget request. Within this amount, 
$122,000 is provided for administration. The Committee 
recommends the following distribution of funds:

        Project                                                   Amount
America's Agricultural Heritage Partnership (Silos & 
    Smokestacks)........................................        $750,000
Augusta Canal NHA.......................................         400,000
Automobile NHA..........................................         600,000
Blue Ridge NHA..........................................       1,000,000
Cache La Poudre River Corridor..........................          45,000
Cane River NHA..........................................         800,000
Delaware and Lehigh NHC.................................         800,000
Erie Canalway National Corridor.........................         700,000
Essex NHA...............................................       1,000,000
Hudson River Valley NHA.................................         500,000
Illinois & Michigan Canal NHC...........................         600,000
John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley NHC..............         795,000
Lackawanna Valley NHA...................................         550,000
National Coal Heritage Area.............................         123,000
Ohio and Erie Canal NHC.................................       1,000,000
Quinnebaug & Shetucket Rivers Valley NHC................         800,000
Rivers of Steel NHA.....................................       1,000,000
Schuylkill River Valley NHA.............................         500,000
Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic 
    District............................................         500,000
South Carolina NHC......................................       1,000,000
Tennessee Civil War Heritage Area.......................         300,000
Wheeling NHA............................................       1,000,000
Yuma Crossing NHA.......................................         210,000
    Project Total.......................................      14,973,000
Administrative..........................................         122,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
    Total...............................................     $15,095,000

    The Committee has been concerned about the use of funds 
provided for the Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area. 
Specifically, funds are not being used for on the ground 
projects that meet the objectives of the management plan. The 
Committee directs that funds be used for a signage program for 
tier I and II heritage sites and a grant program to assist 
heritage sites meet the stated goals of the plan.
    Statutory or Contractual Aid.--The Committee recommends 
$3,794,000 for statutory or contractual aid, a decrease of 
$9,018,000 below the enacted level and an increase of 
$3,794,000 above the request.
    Bill language is recommended to allow the Service to 
provide funds to the City of Tacoma, Washington on a one-time 
basis to fund a feasibility study for the Train to the Mountain 
project. This study will analyze the cost and feasibility of 
utilizing the existing track of the Mountain Division Line, in 
combination with shuttle services, to provide an alternative 
means to transport visitors to Mount Rainier National Park. 
This study must involve the National Park Service and all 
communities and stakeholders in the area. Any future funding 
for this initiative will come from private, local, or federal 
transportation sources.
    Bill language is also included that prohibits the use of 
rivers and trails funds for cooperative agreements, contracts, 
or grants.

                       HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $73,583,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        77,533,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        71,533,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        -2,050,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -6,000,000


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


    The Committee recommends $71,533,000 for historic 
preservation fund programs, a decrease of $2,050,000 below the 
enacted level and a decrease of $6,000,000 below the budget 
request.
    The total amount provides $34,570,000 for State historic 
preservation offices, $2,963,000 for tribal grants, $30,000,000 
for Save America's Treasures and $4,000,000 for Historically 
Black Colleges and Universities. The HBCU program will be a 
competitive program administered by the National Park Service. 
The cost share on this program is 70 percent Federal, 30 
percent private. The Committee was not able to provide the 
$10,000,000 for a new Preserve America program because the 
allocation was $220,000,000 below the President's request.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $329,879,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       329,880,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       297,628,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -32,251,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -32,252,000


    The Committee recommends $297,628,000 for construction, a 
decrease of $32,251,000 below the enacted level and $32,252,000 
below the budget request.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:

        Project                                                   Amount
Allegheny Portage Railroad NHS, PA (rehabilitation).....            $861
Apostle Islands NL, WI (Raspberry Island Light Station).           1,136
Big Bend NP, TX (Chisos Basin)..........................           2,000
Blue Ridge Parkway, NC (destination center).............           3,000
Boston NHP, MA (rehabilitation).........................           1,187
Cane River Creole NHP, LA (stabilization)...............           1,068
Chattahoochee River NRA, GA.............................           2,125
Chesapeake & Ohio Canal NHP, DC, MD, VA (Great Falls)...           1,776
Cumberland Island NS, GA (Plum Orchard).................             264
Cumberland Island NS, GA (stabilization)................           1,285
Cuyahoga NP, OH (rehabilitation)........................           2,500
Dayton Aviation NHP, OH (Huffman Prairie hangar)........             650
Delaware Water Gap NRA, PA (cabin replacement)..........           1,000
Delaware Water Gap NRA, NJ (Depew Recreation site)......           2,298
Everglades NP, FL (water system)........................           8,077
Fire Island NS, NY (rehabilitation).....................           2,374
Flight 93 National Memorial, PA.........................             806
Fort Larned NHS, KS (Old Commissary)....................             869
Frederick Law Olmsted NHS, MA (upgrades)................           2,011
George Washington Carver NM, MO (rehabilitation/
    expansion)..........................................           1,200
George Washington Memorial Parkway (rehabilitation).....             300
Gettysburg NMP, PA (visitor center).....................           5,000
Great Smoky Mountain NP, NC, TN (water & sewer system)..           2,171
Hampton NHS, MD (Hampton Mansion).......................           1,546
Homestead NM of America, NE (visitor center)............           2,500
Klondike Gold Rush NHP, AK..............................             739
Lassen Volcanic NP, CA..................................          10,051
Lincoln Library, IL.....................................           5,000
Manassas NB Park (rehabilitation), VA...................           2,317
Martin Luther King, Jr., NHS, GA........................           2,459
Moccasin Bend NAD, TN (planning)........................             400
Monocacy NB, MD (visitor center)........................           3,539
Olympic NP, WA..........................................           1,940
Olympic NP, WA (Elwha River Ecosystem)..................          26,950
Organ Pipe Cactus NM, NM (vehicle barrier)..............           6,600
Petersburg NB, VA.......................................             812
Point Reyes NS, CA (Marina Railway).....................           1,885
Point Reyes NS, CA (watershed restoration)..............           2,077
Pu'uhonua o Honaunau NHP, HI............................           1,112
Rock Creek Park, DC (preservation)......................           3,007
San Francisco Maritime NHP, CA (Sala Burton Maritime 
    Museum).............................................           4,183
Saratoga NHP, NY (Victory Woods planning)...............             295
Saugus Iron Works NHS, MA (rehabilitation)..............           1,283
Southwest Pennsylvania Heritage Commission, PA..........           2,500
Timucuan Ecological & Historic Preserve, FL (planning)..             388
Tuskegee Airmen NHS, AL (site development & utilities)..           1,500
Washington Office (storm damage)........................          14,000
Western Arctic National Parklands, AK...................          14,708
White House, DC (Executive Residence)...................           9,938
Yellowstone NP, WY (infrastructure improvements)........           1,000
Yellowstone NP, WY (Madison wastewater facilities)......           3,956
Yellowstone NP, WY (Old House at Old Faithful Inn)......           9,801
Yellowstone NP, WY (West Entrance Station)..............           1,487
      Project Total.....................................         181,931
Emergency/Unscheduled...................................           4,000
Housing.................................................           8,000
Equipment replacement...................................          39,100
Planning, construction..................................          21,220
General management plans................................          13,313
Construction program management.........................          27,364
Dam safety..............................................           2,700
      Subtotal..........................................         115,697
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total Construction................................         297,628

     The Committee has included $3,000,000 for ongoing work on 
the Blue Ridge Parkway destination center; $264,000 for 
continued planning and compliance work on Plum Orchard within 
the Cumberland Island National Seashore; $2,500,000 for 
rehabilitation work at Cuyahoga National Recreation Area, and 
$650,000 for the Huffman Prairie hanger at Dayton Aviation 
National Historical Park.
     Funding will not be recommended for construction of a 
curatorial storage facility for Big Bend National Park until 
planning is sufficiently underway and reviewed by the Park 
Service Development Advisory Board. The Service is reminded 
that the cost estimate associated with this facility a year ago 
was $1,900,000. Committee support for this project is based on 
this number; any serious deviation from this estimate will 
jeopardize future funds.
     Within the funds provided for lump sum planning, the 
Service is to initiate pre-design work for the restoration of 
the Bodie Island Lighthouse at Cape Hatteras National Seashore. 
This project is currently scheduled for construction in fiscal 
year 2007, with an estimated gross construction cost of 
$2,330,000.
     Also included is $1,200,000 to complete work at George 
Washington Carver National Monument; $300,000 for 
rehabilitation work along the George Washington Memorial 
Parkway; $5,000,000 for Gettysburg National Military Park; and 
$2,500,000 for continuing work on the Homestead National 
Monument visitor center.
     The Committee recommendation provides $1,000,000 for 
facility improvements to address the lodging conditions at the 
Pocono Environmental Education Center at the Delaware Water Gap 
National Recreation Area. Last year, $300,000 was provided to 
initiate work on this effort, to complete a site development 
plan and value analysis before beginning detailed project 
design. While this work has not yet begun, the Committee 
expects the park and partner to undertake this effort 
collaboratively during fiscal year 2005 within the funds 
provided. It is important that the park and partner come to 
mutual agreement about future development at the site; common 
agreement as to the necessary planning and compliance 
requirements for the site; and a clear understanding of future 
costs and fundraising strategies for any expanded development 
beyond current levels.
    The Committee understands that the estimated cost to 
undertake rehabilitation of the cabins and to support existing 
program levels, is approximately $2,500,000. The value analysis 
recommended last year is intended to help both parties 
determine how best to accomplish the objectives within this 
funding target. Any larger development program must be non-
Federally funded. In the meanwhile, the Committee has no 
objection to the fiscal year 2004 funds being used for 
rehabilitation and improvements to existing cabins.
    The Committee has provided $5,000,000 for the Lincoln 
Library; $2,500,000 for the Southwest Pennsylvania Heritage 
Commission; and $388,000 for planning at Timucuan Ecological 
and Historic Preserve.
    The $400,000 provided for Moccasin Bend at Chickamauga and 
Chattanooga National Military Park is for a development concept 
plan for this newly authorized area. The Committee understands 
there is considerable local support for a significant visitor 
facility. The Service must first complete the appropriate 
management planning and scoping to determine site requirements 
and facility needs. The park must also work with the Service's 
visitor facility-planning model in order to determine an 
appropriately sized facility that can be operated and 
maintained given foreseeable budget constraints. The local 
friends group is encouraged to participate actively in the 
planning process, and to consider feasible partnership 
components that could be value-added to what the Service might 
otherwise construct, such as, undertaking a fundraising 
campaign for exhibits or a visitor center film.
    The Committee provides $295,000 for planning associated 
with visitor access to the Victory Woods site at Saratoga 
National Historical Park. These funds are available for 
archeological surveys, cultural landscape inventory and report, 
site planning and design, environmental assessment, and 
compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act. It is 
anticipated that these surveys will largely be conducted during 
the spring and summer season, and that site planning would 
follow upon completion. Phase II of the project, which entails 
implementation of visitor access and site improvements, is 
expected to be ready for construction in fiscal year 2006, at 
an estimated cost of approximately $300,000. The Committee 
expects planning to commence consistent with this total funding 
level. The Committee understands that this cost estimate does 
not include road and parking improvements, which should be 
contributed by non-Federal sources.
    The Committee has provided $1,500,000 for ongoing site 
development and utility work at Tuskegee Airmen National 
Historical Site in Alabama.
    The Service is directed to provide funds to complete the 
Muscle Shoals National Heritage Area Study from within the 
amounts provided. Within available funds, the Service should 
begin funding the Buffalo Bayou National Heritage study and the 
Waco Mammoth site new area study located in Texas.
    The Committee has provided funding over several fiscal 
years for environmental studies affecting the George Washington 
Memorial Parkway, including the northern extension of the Mount 
Vernon Trail, the Belle Haven Marina, and the Arlington 
Boathouse. These studies continue to be delayed without 
explanation. The Committee directs the Service to complete 
these studies within available funds by the end of fiscal year 
2005. An interim report is due three months after enactment of 
this Act.
    Partnership Construction Projects.--The Committee has 
included bill language that imposes a temporary moratorium on 
all partnership projects in excess of $5,000,000 without 
written approval from the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations. It excludes the Flight 93 Memorial. This 
language applies to both new projects and those already under 
consideration. This language does not allow the partners to 
fund planning and design of a project that has not been 
approved by the Committee.
    This provision is necessary because the Committee included 
bill language in the Interior and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act for the last two fiscal years, directing the 
National Park Service not to spend funds on planning or 
construction of any new facility that has not been approved by 
the Committee. This was done in an effort to ensure that low 
priority, expensive, oversized facilities, that ultimately 
result in increased requirements for operations and maintenance 
funding, were not pursued. While the Service has complied with 
this direction regarding line-item construction projects, the 
Service has yet to attain a full comprehension of the magnitude 
of capital improvement projects being pursued at the park level 
with expectations of future funding. Of particular concern are 
project concepts that proceed to the point of needing funding 
immediately, thus bypassing established budget procedures and 
processes. In some instances, the Service has allowed partners 
to plan and design projects, which then results in an 
expectation of immediate Federal funding. This is unacceptable.
    In many cases, National Park and Regional Office staff have 
ignored the Service's own internal directive--Director's Order 
21--which provides specific guidance from the Director to the 
field on how to manage private sector partnership projects. In 
addition, the Committee understands that there are some types 
of partnership projects that involve States and other Federal 
agencies that have no specific guidance at all.
    The Committee discussed these issues during the FY 2005 
budget hearing in March 2004. Since that time, the Committee 
has become aware that there are over 100 additional partnership 
projects with a potential Federal cost in excess of $300 
million. It remains unclear which of these projects are 
programmed to receive funding in established Federal programs 
(NPS or other), which anticipate pursuing other competitively 
available Federal or non-Federal funds, and which are simply 
desired projects at the local level that have not been reviewed 
and/or approved at the regional and Washington office level. 
Most of these projects have never been formally discussed with 
the Committee. In fact, the Service has made informal 
commitments to many private partners for Federal money without 
the knowledge of the Committee. If only a portion of these 
projects were funded, it would have a devastating impact on 
both major backlog maintenance projects funded in the line item 
construction account and on the operating account for the 
National Parks. The situation is currently out of control and 
this provision is needed to allow the Service to demonstrate 
its capacity to exercise greater control over the planning and 
early stages of partnership construction projects.
    Since the spring, there have been continuing reports in 
newspapers across the Nation about parks needing to reduce 
hours of operations and services to the American public because 
of operational shortfalls. If there are true shortfalls, which 
the Committee believes there are, it makes no sense to compound 
the problem by encouraging large, expensive construction 
projects outside the regular budget process that also have huge 
operational implications. Even the best intentions by the 
Service to fund large construction projects completely with 
private funding sometimes fall short of expectations. 
Unfortunately, this also results in delaying critical backlog 
projects and other priority needs of the Service.
    The Committee recognizes that the Service is in the process 
of setting up strict new guidelines for dealing with 
partnership projects. Specific direction from the Director has 
been forwarded to the field. While the Committee appreciates 
this effort, it reminds the Service that the current process 
was not followed. The Service should address the requirements 
for both public-private and public-public partnerships. Both 
types of partnerships must recognize the constraints and 
uncertainties associated with the Federal budget process. 
Without the direct involvement of senior park management, 
including the Director, Deputy Directors, and Regional 
Directors, the new system will not work either.
    The Service is strongly encouraged to rethink the 
partnership projects identified to the Committee in light of 
the considerable operational needs facing the parks today and 
the overall constraints on federal domestic spending. The 
Committee has supported the concept of partnerships, and does 
not wish to diminish or discourage the history of philanthropic 
giving that has benefited the national parks since their 
earliest days. At the same time, however, the Committee 
reiterates that partnership construction projects must be done 
for the right reasons, at the right size, at the right cost, 
and with defensible and attainable operational requirements. 
While the Service plays a significant role in managing these 
construction projects, the partners and the Service play a 
significant role in generating expectations. All parties must 
play a role in addressing the concerns raised.
    The Committee recognizes that the Service has committed to 
review the agreements associated with partnership construction 
projects, including fundraising agreements. As part of its 
review and analysis of the projects identified to date, the 
Committee expects the Service to examine carefully whether all 
of these partnerships can be sustained and, if not, whether 
they should be pursued. The Service has also committed to 
quarterly reporting on its progress in improving management of 
partnership construction projects. The Committee will be 
monitoring the Service's progress over the course of the next 
year to determine whether further changes are needed before 
lifting the moratorium.

                    LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND

                              (RESCISSION)




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      -$30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       -30,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       -30,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends the rescission of $30,000,000 in 
the annual contract authority provided by 16 U.S.C. 4601-10a. 
This authority has not been used in years, and there are no 
plans to use it in fiscal year 2005.

                 LAND ACQUISITION AND STATE ASSISTANCE




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $135,594,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       178,124,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       107,500,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -28,094,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -70,624,000


    The Committee recommends $107,500,000 for land acquisition 
and State assistance, a decrease of $70,624,000 below the 
budget request and $28,094,000 below the enacted level. Within 
the funds provided, $91,500,000 is for assistance to States, of 
which $1,500,000 is for administrative expenses, and 
$16,000,000 is for Federal land acquisition program activities, 
including $3,000,000 for emergencies and hardships, $10,000,000 
for acquisition management, and $3,000,000 for inholdings.
    For the purposes of acquiring the Orange Hill patented 
mining claim within the Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and 
Preserve, the Committee expects the Service to commence 
acquisition negotiations based upon an appraisal of the market 
value of the property prepared in conformance with the Uniform 
Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions. In the 
determination of highest and best use, the appraisal should 
consider all available economic uses of the property, shall 
recognize statutory rights of surface access to the property, 
and consider the prices of other mining claims, patented and 
unpatented, within other Alaska National Park System units 
including Denali National Park and Preserve.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Bill Language.--Existing concession contracts provide for a 
contractual right of compensation, known as ``possessory 
interest'' in structures, fixtures or improvements made or 
acquired by the concessioner under the terms of the contract. 
The amount of compensation is described in the contracts as the 
``fair value'' of a PI, which is deemed to be its ``sound 
value.'' The contracts provide that ``the sound value of any 
structure, fixture, or improvement shall be determined upon the 
basis of any reconstruction cost less depreciation evidenced by 
its condition and prospective serviceability in comparison with 
a new unit of like kind, but not to exceed fair market value.'' 
However, the results of recent value determination proceedings 
suggest that valuations do, in fact, exceed the fair market 
value of the improvements provided by the concessioner, and 
suggest that the value may be based, in part, on the value of 
the underlying land or business operations of the concessioner, 
rather than the improvements. There is currently no procedure 
in place for review of these determinations when flaws in the 
process are suspected. Language is included in the bill that 
will provide the Secretary the authority to seek judicial 
review when appropriate.
    In addition, the Committee recognizes that possessory 
interest and leasehold surrender interest impose a significant 
Federal debt. To help mitigate the budgetary impact of this 
debt, language has been included to allow the Secretary to 
manage this debt by providing some flexibility in the use of 80 
percent of concession franchise fees, rather than appropriated 
funds, to assist in the reduction or extinguishment of such 
contractual obligations in park units other than those that 
collected the franchise fees. Such use of the franchise fees 
from other units will be on ``loan'' basis, with the benefiting 
unit responsible for crediting the ``loaned'' franchise fees 
back to the originating park within the term of the benefiting 
park's contract.

                    United States Geological Survey

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

                 SURVEYS, INVESTIGATIONS, AND RESEARCH




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $937,985,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       919,788,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       944,498,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +6,513,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       +24,710,000


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


    The Committee recommends $944,498,000 for surveys, 
investigations, and research, an increase of $24,710,000 above 
the budget request and $6,513,000 above the fiscal year 2004 
enacted level.
    For the fifth year in a row the Committee has partially 
restored a number of high-priority research programs that were 
proposed for reduction or elimination. The Administration has 
placed a high priority on cooperative programs that leverage 
funds from State and local governments as well as private 
entities. The Survey has been a leader in the development of 
cooperative programs and outsourcing its activities. The 
Committee believes that Bureaus that are successful in 
implementing these policies should be rewarded and not 
penalized.
    National Mapping Program.--The Committee recommends 
$122,779,000 for the national mapping program, $3,838,000 above 
the budget request and $6,980,000 below the 2004 enacted level. 
Changes from the request include increases of $483,000 to 
restore the streamlining cut, $2,355,000 for national map 
activities, and $1,000,000 to meet the Survey's obligations for 
North Carolina flood mapping.
    The Committee is concerned that the Survey is not 
adequately planning for the future of the Landsat 7 program. 
The Committee has twice reprogrammed funding to keep Landsat 7 
operations going under the condition that a short-term fix and 
a long-term solution to the problem be investigated. To date, 
no solutions to the problem of continuing operations for a 
degraded satellite have been proposed. The Committee will no 
longer increase funding, or reprogram funding from other 
ongoing Survey programs, to keep the Landsat 7 program 
operating. The Committee recommends that the Survey operate the 
Landsat 7 program from within base funds and collect and 
archive data only. If additional funds are needed for 
distribution of data and operation of the international ground 
stations, then those funds must be generated by data sales and 
reimbursable agreements with other Federal agencies and 
institutions. The Committee agrees that long-term remote 
sensing data are vital to many aspects of the government and 
private sector. The Committee encourages the Administration to 
work with NASA and other Federal agencies to place the next 
generation Landsat sensor in orbit as soon as possible to 
reduce future data gaps.
    The Committee supports the Survey's efforts to manage more 
efficiently the growing volume of data at the EROS Data Center. 
Accordingly, the Committee supports efforts by the Survey to 
convert its archived remote sensing data from outdated storage 
media to disk based storage. The Committee believes this 
conversion will accommodate growing volumes of data and provide 
access to users more efficiently and at lower cost. Further, 
the Committee supports the employment of data replication 
technologies that will reduce failures within the data storage 
infrastructure and will ensure recovery from any potential 
outage.
    Geologic Hazards, Resources and Processes.--The Committee 
recommends $230,894,000 for geologic hazards, resources, and 
processes, $10,140,000 above the budget request and $3,289,000 
below the 2004 enacted level. Changes from the request include 
increases of $840,000 to restore streamlining cuts, $1,350,000 
for the ANSS program, $750,000 to further the Survey's work on 
landslide hazards, $250,000 to continue to study the impacts of 
global dust events on coral reefs, $1,600,000 to restore the 
Tampa Bay Pilot coastal project, and $6,500,000 to restore the 
cut to mineral resource assessments, and decreases of $400,000 
for the earth observation and monitoring program, $250,000 for 
geothermal assessments, and $500,000 for science on DOI 
landscape.
    The Committee strongly disagrees with the proposed 
reduction in the Survey's mineral resources program. Minerals 
and mineral products are important to the U.S. economy with 
processed minerals accounting for adding billions of dollars to 
the economy in 2003. Mineral commodities are essential to both 
national security and infrastructure development. Mineral 
resources research and assessments are a core responsibility of 
the Survey.
    Water Resources Investigations.--The Committee recommends 
$211,249,000 for water resources investigations, $8,567,000 
above the budget request and $4,465,000 below the 2004 enacted 
level. Changes from the request include increases of $742,000 
to restore streamlining reductions, $800,000 for the water 
availability project, $250,000 for Potomac River groundwater 
assessments, $250,000 for increased reporting requirements 
associated with the San Pedro Partnership, $500,000 for the 
Rathdrum Prairie aquifer, $250,000 for the Chesapeake Bay 
program, $350,000 for the Hood Canal dissolved oxygen study, 
and $6,500,000 for the Water Resource Research Institutes, and 
decreases of $200,000 for the SPARROW model, $375,000 for 
science on the DOI landscape, and $500,000 for the Klamath 
Basin initiative. The Committee directs the Survey to dedicate 
$2,000,000 in existing funds to the ongoing Lake Pontchartrain 
restoration project.
    The Committee recommendation increases the funding for the 
water availability project proposed in the request by $800,000. 
This program, as outlined in the Survey's November 2003 
implementation plan, calls for the establishment of two pilot 
projects at an estimated cost of $5,200,000. Due to current 
budget constraints, the Committee recommendation does not fully 
fund the pilot project, but funding is included to initiate the 
Survey's top priority pilot project in the Great Lakes region. 
The Committee expects the Administration to continue to request 
funding in future budgets to expand this program for other 
areas of the country.
    Biological Research.--The Committee recommends $171,976,000 
for biological research, $4,372,000 above the budget request 
and $2,553,000 below the 2004 enacted level. Changes to the 
request include increases of $602,000 to restore streamlining 
reductions, $2,800,000 to restore the interagency cooperative 
fire science program, $500,000 for manatee research, $170,000 
for equipment at the Anadromous Fish Research Lab, $250,000 for 
the Great Lakes Deepwater Large Vessel program, $400,000 to 
restore the Nebraska Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research 
Unit, and $500,000 for a general increase to the Cooperative 
Research Unit program, and decreases of $350,000 for science on 
the DOI landscape, and $500,000 for the Klamath Basin 
initiative. Within base funding, the Committee directs the 
Survey to provide an additional $75,000 for the Southeastern 
Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study for chronic wasting disease 
research and $250,000 to continue the Delaware River Basin 
Ecologically Sustainable Water Management Project.
    The Committee is concerned about the growth of the National 
Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII); the number of 
planned regional and thematic nodes is too high and 
inadequately justified. The Committee does not agree that 
having 12 separate regions is necessary to distribute 
electronic information over the World Wide Web. The Committee 
directs the Survey to locate all new ``thematic'' nodes in the 
same physical location as existing regional nodes and to 
consolidate operational expenses. The Committee also suggests 
that the Survey reduce the number of planned NBII regions and 
realign existing regions to align better with the Survey's 
existing regional structure.
    The Committee has provided an increase for the Cooperative 
Fish and Wildlife Research Units. The Committee is concerned 
about the strategic growth of this system and directs the 
Survey to develop a long-term plan addressing the number and 
location of new units that are needed prior to any expansion of 
the system. This plan should be delivered to the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations no later than December 31, 
2004.
    Enterprise Information.--The Committee recommends 
$44,148,000 for Enterprise Information, $999,000 below the 
budget request, and $44,148,000 above the 2004 enacted level. 
Changes to the budget request include decreases of $250,000 for 
the Enterprise Services Network, $5,000 for e-government, 
$64,000 for Safecom, and $680,000 for Disaster.gov. Enterprise 
Information is a new activity in the 2005 request, derived from 
transfers from other Survey activities.
    Science Support.--The Committee recommends $67,508,000 for 
science support, $1,208,000 below the request and $23,303,000 
below the 2004 enacted level. Changes from the request include 
an increase of $311,000 to restore the ``streamlining'' savings 
and decreases of $414,000 for e-government, $700,000 for 
financial management improvements, and $405,000 for competitive 
sourcing activities.
    Facilities.--The Committee recommends $95,944,000 for 
facilities, the same as the budget request and $2,955,000 above 
the 2004 enacted level.
    Bill language is included in Title III--General Provisions 
regarding e-government initiatives and competitive sourcing 
studies.

                      Minerals Management Service

    The Minerals Management Service is responsible for 
collecting, distributing, accounting and auditing revenues from 
mineral leases on Federal and Indian lands. In fiscal year 
2004, MMS expects to collect and distribute about $7.1 billion 
from active Federal and Indian leases.
    The MMS also manages the offshore energy and mineral 
resources on the Nation's outer continental shelf. To date, the 
OCS program has been focused primarily on oil and gas leasing. 
Over the past several years, MMS has been exploring the 
possible development of other marine mineral resources, 
especially sand and gravel.
    With the passage of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, MMS 
assumed increased responsibility for oil spill research, 
including the promotion of increased oil spill response 
capabilities, and for oil spill financial responsibility 
certifications of offshore platforms and pipelines. The MMS 
also operates the Interior Franchise Fund: the entrepreneurial 
GovWorks enterprise provides important procurement services to 
a variety of governmental agencies.

                ROYALTY AND OFFSHORE MINERALS MANAGEMENT




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $263,510,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       275,305,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       275,305,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       +11,795,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $275,305,000 for royalty and 
offshore minerals management, the same as the budget request 
and $11,795,000 above the 2004 enacted level, of which 
$103,730,000 is derived from receipts. The Committee 
recommendation provides for the Administration's requested 
activities except for certain E-GOV Quicksilver projects. The 
Committee has recommended bill language, in Title III--General 
Provisions, prohibiting the use of funds for Safecom, Disaster 
Management, E-Training, and E-Rulemaking activities. Funds 
requested for these activities should be reprogrammed to the 
environmental studies program, to offset partially the proposed 
redirection of funds within that activity.
    Bill language is included earmarking $81,906,000 for 
royalty management activities. The Committee has also included 
new bill language giving the MMS authority to pay any late 
disbursement interest caused by delays in processing royalty 
payments for States and tribes out of the federal royalty share 
rather than the agency's appropriated funds. Given the recent 
problems caused by disruption of internet service through no 
fault of the agency, and its impacts on the MMS's ability to 
process royalty payments in a timely fashion, the Committee 
believes this additional authority is necessary.

                           OIL SPILL RESEARCH




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $7,017,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         7,105,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         7,105,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................           +88,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $7,105,000 to be derived from the 
Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, to conduct oil spill research 
and financial responsibility and inspection activities 
associated with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, Public Law 101-
380. The Committee recommendation is equal to the budget 
request and $88,000 above the fiscal year 2004 level.

          Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement

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

                       REGULATION AND TECHNOLOGY




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $105,384,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       108,905,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       108,905,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +3,521,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $108,905,000, the budget request, 
for regulation and technology, including the use of $100,000 in 
civil penalty collections. This is $3,521,000 above the 2004 
level. The increase in funds over the enacted funding level is 
to offset partially increases in uncontrollable costs for 
States and the OSM and for other requested activities. The 
Committee has recommended bill language, in Title III--General 
Provisions, prohibiting the use of funds for Safecom, Disaster 
Management, E-Training, and E-Rulemaking activities. Funds 
requested for these activities should be reprogrammed to cover 
equitably fixed cost increases not funded in the budget 
request.

                    ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $190,591,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       243,863,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       194,106,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +3,515,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -49,757,000


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


    The Committee recommends $194,106,000 for the abandoned 
mine reclamation fund, $49,757,000 below the budget request and 
$3,515,000 above the 2004 funding level. The recommendation 
does not include the requested allocation of $53,000,000 to 
implement the Administration's legislative proposal which would 
return the State share balances to certified States. The 
recommendation does include other aspects of the Administration 
request under this heading, but does not allow any funds to be 
transferred for certain E-GOV Quicksilver projects. The 
Committee has recommended bill language, in Title III--General 
Provisions, prohibiting the use of funds for Safecom, Disaster 
Management, E-Training, and E-Rulemaking activities. Funds 
requested for these activities should be reprogrammed to cover 
equitably fixed cost increases not funded in the budget 
request. Funding for AML grants and the environmental 
restoration activity are maintained at the fiscal year 2004 
level, an increase of $3,243,000 above the request. The 
Committee has also retained language, as in past years, which 
limits funding for minimum program States to $1,500,000 and 
provides Maryland special flexibility.
    The Committee recognizes the merit of the Administration's 
legislative proposal to extend and modify the Surface Mining 
Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA), which is included in H.R. 
3778. Without reauthorization, the existing State and tribal 
share accounts would not receive any additional fees collected 
after September 30, 2004. The Committee notes that legislative 
action is still pending on this proposal, so funds are not 
included at this time for its implementation. The Committee 
encourages the authorizing committees to act on this reasonable 
legislative proposal, which would increase the rate at which 
dangerous abandoned sites would be reclaimed; do so at a lower 
cost; and provide a fair and reasonable method of compensating 
Wyoming, which has completed abandoned coal mine reclamation. 
The Committee expects to revisit funding needs for this account 
once reauthorization occurs. Absent legislative action, 
existing law will allow continued distribution of AML funds to 
States in a manner similar to that which occurred in fiscal 
year 2004.

                        Bureau of Indian Affairs

    The Bureau of Indian Affairs was created in 1824. Its 
mission is founded on a government-to-government relationship 
and trust responsibility that results from treaties with Native 
groups. The Bureau delivers services to over 1.5 million Native 
Americans through 12 regional offices and 83 agency offices. In 
addition, the Bureau provides education programs to Native 
Americans through the operation of 118 day schools, 52 boarding 
schools, and 14 dormitories. The Bureau administers more than 
45 million acres of tribally owned land, and 10 million acres 
of individually owned land and over 309,000 acres of Federally 
owned land, which is held in trust status.

                      OPERATION OF INDIAN PROGRAMS




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................    $1,892,706,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................     1,929,477,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................     1,935,033,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       +42,327,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        +5,556,000


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


    The Committee recommends $1,935,033,000 for the operation 
of Indian programs, $5,556,000 above the budget request and 
$42,327,000 above the 2004 enacted level.
    Tribal Priority Allocations.--The Committee recommends 
$775,631,000 for tribal priority allocations, the same as the 
budget request and $4,994,000 above the fiscal year 2004 
enacted level.
    Other Recurring Programs.--The Committee recommends 
$612,103,000 for other recurring programs, $11,492,000 above 
the budget request and $2,033,000 below the 2004 enacted level. 
Changes from the budget request include increases of $1,942,000 
for student transportation, $3,000,000 for the administrative 
cost grant fund, $4,000,000 for the timber-fish-wildlife 
program, $320,000 for Upper Columbia United Tribes, $630,000 
for Lake Roosevelt management, $600,000 for Wetlands and 
Waterfowl Management (Circle of Flight) and $1,000,000 for the 
intertribal bison council. The funds within the base for the 
Chippewa/Ottawa Resource Authority (CORA) are to be allocated 
based on the allocation in House Report 108-10.
    The Committee has again restored the $3,000,000 for start-
up administrative costs and overhead as incentives for tribal 
school boards to begin to assume responsibility for the 
remaining schools that are still being managed by the Bureau. 
The Committee expects this to be a separate fund to enable the 
conversion of Bureau operated schools without compromising 
funding for tribally operated schools.
    Non Recurring Programs.--The Committee recommends 
$73,161,000 for non-recurring programs, $150,000 above the 
budget request and $2,480,000 below the 2004 enacted level. The 
increase above the budget request is for water management 
planning and predevelopment for the Seminole tribe to address 
water quality programs as part of Everglades restoration 
efforts.
    Central Office Operations.--The Committee recommends 
$145,021,000 for central office operations, $10,577,000 above 
the budget request and $56,515,000 above the 2004 enacted 
level. Changes from the request include an increase of 
$20,577,000 to reflect internal transfers made in fiscal year 
2004 and a decrease of $10,000,000 for information resources 
technology.
    The Committee commends the Bureau for the significant 
progress it has made in addressing the information technology 
needs for their day-to-day operations and for continuing to 
move forward on trust reform efforts. The reduction to the 
increase proposed in the budget request is a result of the 
current budget constraints. The Committee appreciates that the 
Bureau is taking a comprehensive approach to its information 
technology needs and has agreed to a $19,051,000 increase above 
the 2004 level for information resources technology.
    Regional Office Operations.--The Committee recommends 
$41,946,000 for regional office operations, $20,577,000 below 
the budget request and $21,740,000 below the 2004 enacted 
level. The decrease to the budget request reflects internal 
transfers made in fiscal year 2004.
    Special Programs and Pooled Overhead.--The Committee 
recommends $287,171,000 for special programs and pooled 
overhead, $3,914,000 above the budget request and $7,071,000 
above the 2004 enacted level. Changes from the budget request 
include increases of $3,000,000 for the United Tribes Technical 
College, $515,000 for the National Ironworkers Training 
Program, and $1,308,000 for Crownpoint Institute and decreases 
of $409,000 for E-government programs and $500,000 for the 
Enterprise Services Network.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $346,825,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       283,126,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       348,626,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +1,801,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       +65,500,000


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


    The Committee recommends $348,626,000 for construction, 
$65,500,000 above the budget request and $1,801,000 above the 
2004 enacted level.
    Education.--The Committee recommends $294,583,000 for 
education construction, $65,500,000 above the budget request 
and $371,000 below the 2004 enacted level. Changes from the 
budget request include an increase of $65,500,000 to restore 
the school construction program, of which $7,000,000 is to 
restore partially the facilities improvement and repair 
program. The funding restored for replacement school 
construction is sufficient to begin the replacement of the 
highest priority schools on the updated priority list provided 
to the Committee in a letter transmitted February 24, 2004.
    Public Safety and Justice.--The Committee recommends 
$4,985,000 for public safety and justice construction, the same 
as the budget request and $4,000 above the 2004 enacted level.
    Resources Management.--The Committee recommends $40,857,000 
for resources management construction, the same as the budget 
request and $2,178,000 above the 2004 enacted level.
    General Administration and Construction Management.--The 
Committee recommends $8,201,000 for general administration and 
construction management, the same as the budget request and 
$10,000 below the 2004 enacted level.
    Bill Language.--Bill language is included providing 
$4,500,000 in the tribal school demonstration program for the 
Eastern Band of Cherokee education facility at the Ravensford 
tract.

 INDIAN LAND AND WATER CLAIM SETTLEMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS PAYMENTS TO 
                                INDIANS




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $54,866,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        34,771,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        44,771,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -10,095,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       +10,000,000


    The Committee recommends $44,771,000 for Indian land and 
water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to Indians, 
$10,000,000 above the budget request and $10,095,000 below the 
2004 enacted level. Funding includes $625,000 for White Earth, 
$250,000 for Hoopa-Yurok, $142,000 for Pyramid Lake, $8,000,000 
for Colorado Ute, $9,972,000 for Cherokee, Choctaw and 
Chickasaw, $10,032,000 for the Quinalt Settlement Agreement, 
$14,000,000 for the Zuni Water Settlement, and 1,750,000 for 
Seneca-Cuba Lake Land Settlement.
    Bill Language.--Bill language is included providing 
$10,032,000 for payment to the Quinault Indian Nation for the 
North Boundary Settlement Agreement.

                 INDIAN GUARANTEED LOAN PROGRAM ACCOUNT




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $6,417,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         6,421,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         6,421,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................            +4,000
    Budget estimate, 2004.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $6,421,000 for the Indian 
guaranteed loan program account, the same as the budget request 
and $4,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level.

                          Departmental Offices


                            Insular Affairs


                       ASSISTANCE TO TERRITORIES

    The Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) was established on 
August 4, 1995, through Secretarial Order No. 3191, which also 
abolished the former Office of Territorial and International 
Affairs. The OIA has important responsibilities to help the 
United States government fulfill its responsibilities to the 
four U.S. territories of Guam, American Samoa (AS), U.S. Virgin 
Islands and the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands 
(CNMI) and also the three freely associated States: the 
Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Republic of the 
Marshall Islands (RMI) and the Republic of Palau. The permanent 
and trust fund payments to the territories and the compact 
nations provide substantial financial resources to these 
governments. During fiscal year 2004 new financial arrangements 
for the Compacts of Free Association with the FSM and the RMI 
were implemented; this also included mandatory payments for 
certain activities previously provided in discretionary 
appropriations as well as Compact impact payments of 
$30,000,000 per year split among Guam, CNMI, AS, and Hawaii.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $75,744,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        72,935,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        74,935,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          -809,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        +2,000,000


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


    The Committee recommends $74,935,000 for assistance to 
territories, $809,000 below the fiscal year 2004 level and 
$2,000,000 above the budget request. The Committee has 
recommended bill language, in Title III--General Provisions, 
prohibiting the use of funds for Safecom, Disaster Management, 
E-Training, and E-Rulemaking activities. Funds requested for 
these activities should be reprogrammed to cover equitably 
fixed cost increases not funded in the budget request.
    Territorial Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$24,115,000 for territorial assistance, $1,093,000 below the 
fiscal year 2004 level and $2,000,000 above the budget request. 
Increases to the budget request include $1,000,000 for urgent 
water system rehabilitation needed in the CNMI and $1,000,000 
for payments to replace the Prior Service Trust Fund. The 
Committee expects the Department to work with governments of 
the CNMI, Guam, Palau, FSM and RMI, as well as with 
representatives of the Prior Service Benefits Board of 
Directors, to establish a funding mechanism through appropriate 
pension or social security systems, which would replace the 
Prior Service Trust Fund for the former employees of the Trust 
Territories. If this cannot be implemented during fiscal year 
2005, the $1,000,000 should be directed to other high priority 
technical assistance program activities. The Committee has 
included $1,000,000 within the technical assistance activity 
for work related to insular measures and assessments, but these 
funds are not provided in a separate budget line as was 
requested. The Committee expects that technical assistance 
funds are sufficient to continue the CNMI immigration 
initiative, including the labor ombudsmen office. In addition, 
the OIA is encouraged to consider, as appropriate, additional 
grants for judicial training for the territories and freely 
associated states.
    American Samoa.--The Committee recommends $23,100,000 for 
American Samoa as requested, an increase of $284,000 above the 
2004 level.
    Northern Mariana Islands/Covenant Grants.--The Committee 
recommends $27,720,000 for CNMI covenant grants, the same as 
the budget request and the 2004 level. The Committee directs 
the Office of Insular Affairs to implement the allocations 
presented in the budget request, but the Secretary may use 
discretion to modify the Covenant funding formula to address 
appropriately court-ordered infrastructure projects in the 
respective territories.
    Guam.--The Committee notes there is mandatory, permanent 
appropriation for Compact impact payments of $30,000,000 per 
year, split among Guam, Hawaii, AS, and the CNMI, are provided 
to compensate governments for the impact of migration from the 
compact nations. The Committee supports the population based 
allocation method currently used by the OIA.

                      COMPACT OF FREE ASSOCIATION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $6,379,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         5,941,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         5,499,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          -880,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................          -442,000


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


    The Committee recommends $5,499,000 for the compact of free 
association, $442,000 below the request and $880,000 below the 
2004 level. The Committee recommendation reduces the allocation 
for Federal services, as these may have been overestimated in 
the request. In addition, while the Committee notes the 
presence of mandatory payments to Enewetak now that the new 
financial arrangements of the Compact are in place, the 
Committee has retained $500,000 in this account to augment 
these payments and provide needed relief because previous 
payments have not had adequate cost adjustments for need or 
inflation.

                        Departmental Management


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $81,599,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        99,103,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        93,051,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       +11,452,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -6,052,000


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


    The Committee recommends $93,051,000 for salaries and 
expenses for departmental management, of which $13,500,000 is 
derived by transfer from the Central Hazardous Materials fund, 
a decrease of $6,052,000 below the budget request and 
$11,452,000 above the 2004 enacted level. Changes from the 
budget request include decreases of $503,000 for Take Pride in 
America, $400,000 for the Office of Law Enforcement, $56,000 
for e-government initiatives, $38,000 for embassy security, and 
$18,555,000 for the financial and business management system. 
Departmental programs that are denied requested increases in 
this appropriation should not be augmented with staffing and 
funds from individual bureaus or any other source to achieve 
the requested level of activity.
    The Committee recommends funding the financial and business 
management system through a transfer of $13,500,000 from prior 
year unobligated balances in the Central Hazardous Material 
Fund. The Committee is supportive of the conversion of 
Department of the Interior bureaus to a new financial and 
business management system, but has not provided the full 
amount requested due to budget constraints.
    Financial Management System.--The Committee cautions the 
Department to avoid the problems identified in a recent GAO 
report on NASA's efforts to implement a new financial 
management system. Specifically, the Department should ensure 
that it builds an appropriate enterprise architecture for its 
financial management system; that it uses disciplined cost 
estimates and recognized best practices in preparing life cycle 
cost estimates; and that the software used is able to capture 
and report all key budget information.
    Land Appraisal Consolidation.--Last year, the Committee 
approved a departmental reprogramming that consolidated the 
land appraisal functions of multiple bureaus in a new 
organization, the Office of Appraisal Services. The purpose of 
the restructuring was to achieve greater independence for the 
appraisal function from the realty management programs of the 
bureaus, as well as to gain greater efficiencies. Funds for the 
transferred functions remain in the bureau accounts during the 
transition period.
    The Committee reminds the Department that several of the 
bureau land acquisition administration accounts received 
reduced funding levels in fiscal year 2004 that are sustained 
in fiscal year 2005. As a result, the funding assumptions of 
the reprogramming must be revised significantly to operate both 
the appraisal and the bureau acquisition management functions 
within appropriated funding amounts through the balance of 
fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year 2005. It was neither the 
Committee's intention to hold the appraisal function harmless 
in achieving the reduced program levels now required, nor to 
affect disproportionately the appraisal function.
    The Committee is concerned about recent actions to increase 
staffing, at high grade levels, in the Office of Appraisal 
Services, at a time when it may not be feasible to support 
these positions. In formulating the operating program for this 
function for FY 2005, the Department should not assume a higher 
funding level than would have been available for these purposes 
had the function remained in the respective bureaus. The 
Committee reminds the Department of the Committee's concerns 
regarding the use of reimbursable support agreements, and will 
not support the use of such funding mechanisms to support 
operations of the appraisal function beyond the levels 
sustainable by the bureau land acquisition management accounts. 
As part of the fiscal year 2006 budget, the Department should 
identify funds to support the appraisal function in the 
Departmental Management account, so that transfers from the 
bureau land acquisition administration accounts are no longer 
necessary.

                       PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES

    Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) provides for payments to 
local units of government containing certain federally owned 
lands. These payments are designed to supplement other Federal 
land receipt sharing payments that local governments may be 
receiving. The recipients may use payments received for any 
governmental purpose.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $224,696,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       226,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       226,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +1,304,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $226,000,000 for PILT, the same as 
the budget request and $1,304,000 above the fiscal year 2004 
level.

                        Office of the Solicitor


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $49,753,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        53,453,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        51,356,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +1,603,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -2,097,000


    The Committee recommends $51,356,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Office of the Solicitor, a decrease of 
$2,097,000 below the budget request and an increase of 
$1,603,000 above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. Changes 
from the budget request include decreases of $267,000 for 
uncontrollable fixed costs, $624,000 for paralegal and support 
positions, $537,000 for support for legal staff, $400,000 for 
computers, $15,000 for e-government initiatives, and $254,000 
for training, audit, and evaluation. Departmental programs that 
are denied requested increases in this appropriation should not 
be augmented with staffing and funds from individual bureaus or 
any other source to achieve the requested level of activity.

                      Office of Inspector General


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $38,271,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        39,400,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        37,655,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          -616,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -1,745,000


    The Committee recommends $37,655,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Office of Inspector General, a decrease of 
$1,745,000 below the budget request and a decrease of $616,000 
below the fiscal year 2004 enacted level. Changes from the 
budget request include decreases of $507,000 for uncontrollable 
fixed costs, $450,000 for staff with non-traditional auditor 
backgrounds, $150,000 for a contract specialist, $150,000 for 
the On TARGET initiative, $78,000 for equipment replacement, 
$300,000 for information management staff, $100,000 for 
information technology standardization, and $10,000 for e-
government initiatives. Departmental programs that are denied 
requested increases in this appropriation should not be 
augmented with staffing and funds from individual bureaus or 
any other source to achieve the requested level of activity.
    Full funding requested for staff with non-traditional 
auditor backgrounds was not provided due to budget constraints. 
The Committee expects the Office of the Inspector General to 
make up the difference by incorporating non-traditional auditor 
training into its professional development and training 
program.
    The Committee expects new funding for the On TARGET 
initiative to be used in conducting verification activities to 
determine whether audit recommendations have been implemented 
as reported to the Department.

             Office of Special Trustee for American Indians


                         FEDERAL TRUST PROGRAMS

    The Office of Special Trustee for American Indians (OST) 
was established by the American Indian Trust Fund Management 
Reform Act of 1994 (Public Law 103-412). The Special Trustee is 
charged with general oversight of Indian trust asset reform 
efforts Department-wide to ensure proper and efficient 
discharge of the Secretary's trust responsibilities to Indian 
Tribes and individual Indians. The Office of the Special 
Trustee was created to ensure that the Department of the 
Interior establishes appropriate policies and procedures, 
develops necessary systems, and takes affirmative actions to 
reform the management of Indian trust funds. In carrying out 
the management and oversight of the Indian trust funds, the 
Secretary has a responsibility to ensure that trust accounts 
are properly maintained, invested and reported in accordance 
with the American Indian Trust Fund Management Reform Act of 
1994, Congressional action, and other applicable laws.
    The Special Trustee for American Indians also has 
responsibility for the related financial trust functions 
including deposit, investment, and disbursement of trust funds. 
The Department has responsibility for what may be the largest 
land trust in the world. Indian trust lands today encompass 
approximately 56 million acres of land--over 10 million acres 
belonging to individual Indians and nearly 45 million acres 
owned by Indian Tribes. On these lands, Interior manages over 
100,000 leases for individual Indians and Tribes. Leasing, use 
permits, sale revenues, and interest of approximately $194 
million per year are collected for approximately 260,000 
individual Indian money accounts, and about $378 million per 
year is collected for about 1,400 tribal accounts per year. In 
addition, the trust manages approximately $2.9 billion in 
tribal funds and $400 million in individual Indian funds.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $187,305,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       247,666,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       196,267,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +8,962,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -51,399,000


    The Committee recommends $196,267,000 for the office of 
special trustee for American Indians, $51,399,000 below the 
budget request and $8,962,000 above the 2004 enacted level.
    Program Operations, Support, and Improvements.--The 
Committee recommends $194,020,000 for program operations, 
support and improvements, $51,399,000 below the budget request 
and $8,962,000 above the 2004 enacted level. The change from 
the request is a decrease of $51,399,000 for the Office of 
Historical trust Accounting.
    Executive Direction.-- The Committee recommends $2,247,000 
for executive direction the same as the budget request and the 
2004 enacted level.
    Bill Language.--The Committee is encouraged by the recent 
mitigation talks in the Cobell vs. Norton litigation. The 
Committee has appropriated hundreds of millions of dollars in 
litigation related activities and feels very strongly that 
these funds could have been better used to fund health and 
education programs in Indian country. In addition to the 
mitigation talks, the House and Senate authorizing committees 
have made commitments to develop a comprehensive legislative 
solution to this ongoing problem. If the case is not resolved, 
the Committee still faces the likelihood of appropriating 
hundreds of millions of dollars, or possibly billions of 
dollars, for an historical accounting. The result of this 
process will likely provide more money to accountants and 
lawyers with little benefit for the individual Indian account 
holders. Therefore, the Committee has included bill language 
that caps the amount of funding available for historical 
accounting at $58,000,000.

                       INDIAN LAND CONSOLIDATION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $21,709,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        70,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        42,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       +20,291,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -28,000,000


    The Committee recommends $42,000,000 for Indian land 
consolidation, $28,000,000 below the budget request and 
$20,291,000 above the 2004 enacted level.

           Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration


                NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGE ASSESSMENT FUND

    The purpose of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment Fund 
is to provide the basis for claims against responsible parties 
for the restoration of injured natural resources. Assessments 
ultimately will lead to the restoration of injured resources 
and reimbursement for reasonable assessment costs from 
responsible parties through negotiated settlements or other 
legal actions. Operating on a ``polluter pays'' principle, the 
program anticipates recovering over $38 million in receipts in 
fiscal year 2004, with the vast majority to be used for the 
restoration of injured resources. The program works to restore 
sites ranging in size from small town landfills to the Exxon 
Valdez oil spill of 1989 in Alaska.
    Prior to fiscal year 1999, this account was included under 
the United States Fish and Wildlife Service appropriation. The 
account was moved to the Departmental Offices appropriation 
because its functions relate to several different bureaus 
within the Department of the Interior.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $5,564,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         5,818,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         5,818,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +254,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $5,818,000, the budget request, 
for the natural resource damage assessment fund, an increase of 
$254,000 above the fiscal year 2004 level.

             GENERAL PROVISIONS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    Sections 101 and 102 provide for emergency transfer 
authority with the approval of the Secretary.
    Section 103 makes permanent a provision that provides for 
warehouse and garage operations and for reimbursement for those 
services.
    Section 104 provides for vehicle and other services.
    Section 105 makes permanent a provision that provides for 
uniform allowances.
    Section 106 makes permanent a provision that provides for 
twelve-month contracts.
    Sections 107 through 109 prohibit the expenditure of funds 
for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) leasing activities in certain 
areas. These OCS provisions are addressed under the Minerals 
Management Service.
    Section 110 prohibits the National Park Service from 
reducing recreation fees for non-local travel through any park 
unit.
    Section 111 limits the investment of Federal funds by 
tribes and tribal organizations to obligations of the United 
States or obligations insured by the United States.
    Section 112 permits the transfer of funds between the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee for 
American Indians.
    Section 113 continues a provision allowing the hiring of 
administrative law judges to address the Indian probate 
backlog.
    Section 114 continues a provision permitting the 
redistribution of tribal priority allocation and tribal base 
funds to alleviate funding inequities.
    Section 115 continues a provision requiring the allocation 
of Bureau of Indian Affairs postsecondary schools funds 
consistent with unmet needs.
    Section 116 continues a provision limiting the use of the 
Huron Cemetery in Kansas City to religious purposes.
    Section 117 continues a provision permitting the conveyance 
of the Twin Cities Research Center of the former Bureau of 
Mines for the benefit of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
    Section 118 continues a provision authorizing a cooperative 
agreement with the Golden Gate National Parks Association.
    Section 119 makes permanent a provision permitting the 
Bureau of Land Management to retain funds from the sale of 
seeds and seedlings.
    Section 120 continues a provision authorizing the Secretary 
of the Interior to use helicopter or motor vehicles to capture 
and transport horses and burros at the Sheldon and Hart 
National Wildlife Refuges.
    Section 121 authorizes federal funds for Shenandoah Valley 
Battlefield NHD and Ice Age NST to be transferred to a State, 
local government, or other governmental land management entity 
for acquisition of lands.
    Section 122 continues a provision prohibiting the closure 
of the underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns NP, NM.
    Section 123 continues a provision preventing the demolition 
of a bridge between New Jersey and Ellis Island.
    Section 124 continues a provision prohibiting the posting 
of signs at Canaveral National Seashore as clothing optional 
areas if it is inconsistent with county ordinance.
    Section 125 continues a provision limiting compensation for 
the Special Master and Court Monitor appointed by the Court in 
Cobell v. Norton to 200 percent of the highest Senior Executive 
Service rate of pay.
    Section 126 continues a provision allowing the Secretary to 
pay private attorney fees for employees and former employees 
incurred in connection with Cobell v. Norton.
    Section 127 continues a provision dealing with the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service's responsibilities for mass marking 
of salmonid stocks.
    Section 128 requires the use of Departmental Management 
funds for operational needs at the Midway Atoll National 
Wildlife Refuge airport.
    Section 129 prohibits the conduct of gaming under the 
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.) on lands 
described in section 123 of the Department of the Interior and 
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001, or land that is 
contiguous to that land.
    Section 130 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
funds to study or implement a plan to drain or reduce water 
levels in Lake Powell.
    Section 131 allows the National Indian Gaming Commission to 
collect $12,000,000 in fees for fiscal year 2006.
    Section 132 makes funds appropriated for fiscal year 2005 
available to the tribes within the California Tribal Trust 
Reform Consortium and others on the same basis as funds were 
distributed in fiscal year 2004, and separates this 
demonstration project from the Department of the Interior's 
trust reform reorganization.
    Section 133 limits the use of the National Mall for special 
events.

                       TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES


                       DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


                             Forest Service

    The U.S. Forest Service manages 192 million acres of public 
lands for multiple use Nationwide, including lands in 44 States 
and Puerto Rico, and cooperates with States, other Federal 
agencies, Tribes and others to sustain the Nation's forests and 
grasslands. The Forest Service administers a wide variety of 
programs, including forest and rangeland research, State and 
private forestry assistance, wildfire suppression and fuels 
reduction, cooperative forest health programs, and human 
resource programs. The National Forest System (NFS) includes 
155 National forests, 20 National grasslands, 20 National 
recreation areas, a National tallgrass prairie, 6 National 
monuments, and 6 land utilization projects. The NFS is managed 
for multiple use, including timber production, recreation, 
wilderness, minerals, grazing, fish and wildlife habitat 
management, and soil and water conservation.
    The Committee congratulates the Forest Service on its first 
century of service to the American public. The Forest Service 
was established on February 1, 1905 when the forest reserves 
were transferred from the General Land Office in the Department 
of the Interior to the newly named, U.S. Forest Service in the 
Department of Agriculture. The Forest Service has played a key 
role in many aspects of American life and has developed and 
implemented important conservation and land management 
practices which have enriched lives, protected and 
rehabilitated watersheds, provided valuable natural resources, 
enhanced vast amounts of habitat for numerous fish, wildlife 
and plants, and provided countless recreational opportunities. 
The science and cooperative forestry programs are unrivaled. As 
the next century unfolds, many new challenges will arise, and 
old problems will need to be addressed. To celebrate this 
centennial, the Committee has set-aside $10,000,000 within the 
national forest system account to fund a new, Centennial of 
Service Challenge program to work with partners to implement 
improvements to the national forest system.

                     FOREST AND RANGELAND RESEARCH

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $266,387,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       280,654,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       280,654,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       +14,267,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $280,654,000 for forest and 
rangeland research, equal to the budget request and $14,267,000 
above the 2004 funding level. This funding level includes 
$52,714,000 for the forest inventory and analysis (FIA) 
program, $1,000,000 above the requested level. The Committee 
notes that an additional $9,000,000 for the FIA program is 
provided within the State and private forestry appropriation, 
for a total increase of $4,972,000 for the FIA program. The 
recommendation does not include the Administration proposal to 
move funds from State and private forestry to research for the 
purpose of technical assistance, technology transfer and 
conservation education. The Forest Service never indicated a 
precise dollar increase for this technical assistance 
adjustment, but the Committee recommendation provides that 
$6,086,000, which the Committee estimates was requested for 
this initiative, should be used for base research programs and 
for fixed cost increases indicated below. Technical transfer 
functions are, and should remain, part of the normal way the 
agency conducts its research and development as well as its 
State and Private forestry functions. Other projects in the 
budget request are approved, but the following activities 
receive total allocations of: $1,600,000 for the advanced 
housing research consortium; $1,500,000 for adelgid research at 
the Northeastern station; $2,500,000 for sudden oak death 
research; $500,000 for emerald ash borer research; $300,000 for 
hemlock wooly adelgid research at Coweeta; $2,000,000 for the 
southern pine beetle initiative; $300,000 for the Olympic 
Natural Resource Center; and $7,109,000 for uncontrollable cost 
increases. The following projects included in the requested 
budget are not funded: Montana State University Skeen range 
research; salvage lumber research at the forest products lab; 
hardwood tree improvement and regeneration in Indiana; and the 
Fernow experimental forest hydrology study, WV.
    Bill Language.--The Committee recommends continuing bill 
language earmarking a specific allocation, $52,714,000 this 
year, for the forest inventory and analysis program.

                       STATE AND PRIVATE FORESTRY

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $329,197,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       294,388,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       282,446,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -46,751,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -11,942,000


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


    The Committee recommends $282,446,000 for State and private 
forestry, $11,942,000 below the budget request and $46,751,000 
below the 2004 funding level. The requested change of program 
responsibility and funding for technology transfer is not 
approved. Other aspects of the budget request are approved, 
unless otherwise stated below. Funding levels are presented as 
changes from the request. All funds requested for the healthy 
forests initiative are included.
    Bill Language.--The Committee recommends continuing bill 
language deriving forest legacy funds from the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund and language requiring notification of the 
Appropriations Committees before allocating forest legacy 
project funds.
    Forest Health Management.--The Committee recommends 
$103,000,000 for forest health management, $21,744,000 above 
the request and $4,430,000 above the enacted level. The 
Committee emphasizes its concern with forest health in the 
broad sense and does not understand why, with the huge concern 
nationally for healthy forests, that the budget request 
included such large decreases for these immensely valuable and 
vital programs. The Committee is concerned about invasive 
exotic pests, which have proven to have huge impacts on 
American forests and trees. Forest health funding fully 
provides for the slow-the-spread gypsy moth program, and 
provides additional resources for work to control and manage 
the Asian long-horned beetle, emerald ash borer and other pests 
in urban settings and adelgids in the east, as well as various 
mountain pine beetles throughout the Rockies and the west. The 
Committee recommendation includes $14,000,000 for southern pine 
beetle forest health activities, including forest 
rehabilitation, disease prevention, and education. This 
consists of $4,000,000 within the Federal lands activity and 
$10,000,000 within the cooperative lands activity for help with 
State and private forests. The Committee expects that the 
Forest Service will establish a priority setting system to 
direct southern pine beetle initiative funds to the most urgent 
areas, as well as performance criteria which favor areas with 
proven success. Use of this funding should be closely 
coordinated with the complementary allocation within research 
and development.
    Federal Lands Forest Health Management.--The Committee 
recommends $55,000,000 for Federal lands forest health 
management, $8,988,000 above the request and $1,171,000 above 
the enacted funding level.
    Cooperative Lands Forest Health Management.--The Committee 
recommends $48,000,000 for cooperative lands forest health 
management, $22,786,000 above the budget request and $3,259,000 
above the enacted funding level. Sudden oak death control and 
management should be provided no less than $2,000,000. Should 
emergency situations arise for this or other pests, the Forest 
Service should use appropriate funding sources elsewhere in the 
Department of Agriculture authorized to provide such urgent 
protective funding. In addition, $250,000 from the cooperative 
forest health activity should be designated for the southern 
Appalachian office of the American Chestnut Foundation.
    Emerging Pests and Pathogens.--The Committee once again 
rejects the request for an emerging pest fund that came with 
unrealistic restrictions. Instead, the Committee has added this 
funding to the base program. Some funds may be retained at 
headquarters in order to respond to new, urgent pest problems. 
The Committee and the Congress have repeatedly discouraged the 
Office of Management and Budget from making this proposal in 
the past, so the Committee requests that it not appear again in 
future proposals.
    Cooperative Fire Protection.--The Committee recommends 
$41,827,000 for cooperative fire protection, $11,722,000 above 
the request and $21,447,000 below the 2004 funding level. Note 
that the fiscal year 2004 funding included $24,853,000 in 
emergency funding for the urgent situation in southern 
California.
    State Fire Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$36,384,000 for State fire assistance, $11,322,000 above the 
requested level and $3,000,000 above the enacted level. Within 
this increase the Committee has provided $5,000,000 above the 
normal allocation to provide treatments in the mountains of 
southern California, especially on State and private lands near 
the San Bernardino NF, where a terrible pest outbreak has 
created an extremely dangerous situation. An additional 
$5,000,000 of the increase is provided to fund, on a cost-share 
basis, community wildfire protection plans. The remainder of 
the increase above the request is for a general program 
increase. The Committee encourages the Forest Service to 
consider projects for this planning for northern Arizona and 
Colorado, two places with proven programs.
    Volunteer Fire Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$5,443,000 for volunteer fire assistance, an increase of 
$400,000 above the request and $406,000 above the enacted 
level. The increase is for the general program. The Committee 
also notes that the cooperative fire portion of the national 
fire plan within the wildland fire management account includes 
a total of $40,000,000 for State fire assistance and $8,000,000 
for volunteer fire assistance.
    Cooperative Forestry.--The Committee recommends 
$131,119,000 for cooperative forestry, $46,581,000 below the 
budget request and $30,308,000 below the 2004 funding level. 
The Forest Service should not spend valuable staff time, for 
which no funds have been budgeted, developing policies and 
promoting other similar, unfunded programs recently authorized, 
but not included in the budget request and never funded.
    Forest Stewardship.--The Committee recommends $37,000,000 
for forest stewardship, $3,692,000 below the budget request and 
$5,116,000 above the enacted level. Within the allocation for 
forest stewardship, the Committee continues funding of $500,000 
for watershed activities in the New York City watershed and 
provides $1,500,000 for the Chesapeake Bay program. The 
Committee expects that at least $3,000,000 of the program 
increase above the enacted level will be used to support 
community wildfire protection planning activities. No funds are 
provided for the requested grant for the Downeast Lakes 
forestry partnership in Maine. No forest stewardship funds 
should be used to support the purchase of lands or interests in 
lands.
    Forest Legacy Program.--The Committee recommends 
$43,119,000 in new funding for the forest legacy program, 
$56,900,000 below the budget request and $21,015,000 below the 
enacted level. The recommendation includes $43,119,000 in 
appropriated funds and uses an additional $5,300,000 from prior 
year funds for new projects. The Committee understands that the 
$5,300,000 is available from projects that have either failed 
or received funding from other sources. This new funding is, as 
was requested by the Administration, derived from the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund. The Committee recommends the following 
distribution of funds:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Committee
    State            Project name         FY05 request    recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AL             Mobile Tensaw Delta....       $1,500,000       $1,200,000
AL             Cumberland Mountain            1,400,000        1,200,000
                (Coon Gulf tract).
CA             Six Rivers to the Sea..        2,800,000        2,300,000
CA             Ridgewood Ranch........          500,000          400,000
CT             Nightingale Pond.......        1,500,000          850,000
DE             Green Horizons.........        1,000,000          800,000
GA             Plum Creek at Broxton          1,500,000        1,200,000
                Rocks.
IA             NE Upper Bluffs........          550,000          350,000
ID             St. Joe Basin, phase 3.        3,500,000        1,000,000
IL             Daggett Ridge..........        1,000,000          500,000
IN             Shawnee Hills..........        1,900,000        1,000,000
KY             Knobs State Forest             2,400,000        1,500,000
                (Kuhn's tract).
MA             Stock Mountain North...          375,000          375,000
MA             Muschopauge Brook......          400,000          300,000
MI             Turtle Lake............        1,000,000          700,000
MN             Brainerd Lakes.........        2,800,000        1,300,000
MT             Blackfoot--Clearwater..        3,300,000        1,000,000
MT             North Swan River Valley        3,000,000        1,000,000
NH             Thirteen Mile Woods II.        2,000,000          500,000
NJ             Raritan River Watershed        4,500,000        3,800,000
                (Dickerson tract).
NM             Horse Springs Ranch....        2,500,000        1,700,000
NY             Tahawus................        2,500,000        1,700,000
PA             Birdsboro Waters.......        2,200,000        1,300,000
PR             La Jungla..............        2,000,000        1,000,000
SC             Catawba-Wateree Forest.        3,000,000        1,500,000
TN             Walls of Jericho.......        5,900,000        2,000,000
TN             Scott's Gulf...........        1,500,000        1,200,000
UT             Pioneer Ranch..........          750,000          500,000
UT             Cedar Project (Iron            2,300,000        1,000,000
                County tract).
VA             Dragon Run.............          800,000          600,000
VA             The Cove...............          440,000          240,000
VI             Annaly Bay/Hermitage           1,000,000          900,000
                Valley.
VT             Mt. Holly Wildlife             1,500,000          500,000
                Corridor II.
WA             Cedar Green Forest.....        2,000,000        1,600,000
WA             Carbon River Forest,           1,600,000        1,300,000
                phase 1.
WI             Wolf River.............        4,500,000        2,000,000
WI             Tomahawk--Northwoods--I        4,000,000        2,500,000
                II.
WV             Potomac River Hills....        1,000,000          500,000
               Other requested               18,500,000  ...............
                projects.
               Forest Legacy Program          5,104,000        5,104,000
                Administration,
                Acquisition
                Management, and
                Assessment of Need
                Planning.
                                       ---------------------------------
               Subtotal...............      100,019,000       48,419,000
               Use of prior year funds  ...............       -5,300,000
                                       ---------------------------------
                 Total................     $100,019,000      $43,119,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Urban and Community Forestry.--The Committee recommends 
$32,000,000 for urban and community forestry, $39,000 above the 
budget request and $2,864,000 below the 2004 funding level. 
This recommendation includes $600,000 within available funds to 
continue supporting the long-standing and successful 
northeastern Pennsylvania community forestry program.
    The Committee has carefully evaluated the urban and 
community forestry program this year. While the program has 
general merit, it needs better direction and focus, as well as 
a budget allocation method, which allows funds to be focused on 
priority areas, rewards meritorious performance, and does not 
discriminate against States and areas with large, urban 
populations. The Committee believes the Forest Service should 
immediately phase-in a new allocation method. The new 
allocation methodology should be in place in fiscal year 2005 
and allow each State, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico 
$175,000 as a base allocation, and $75,000 for territories and 
former territories. After subtracting congressional priorities, 
base State and territorial allocations, $1,000,000 should be 
allocated for competitive grants recommended by the advisory 
committee and the remainder of the funds should be distributed 
according to the process under development by the Forest 
Service. This process should allow the national office and 
regions to focus grants to particular problem areas of concern 
to the urban forestry community.
    Economic Action Programs.--The Committee recommends 
$10,000,000 for economic action programs, $15,606,000 below the 
2004 level. This program was not included in the budget 
request. Within the economic action program the Committee 
recommends: $5,100,000 for the economic recovery base program; 
$600,000 to continue the rural technology forestry initiative 
in Washington state; $500,000 to continue the mine 
reforestation work in Kentucky; $600,000 to continue the 
forestry technology work at SUNY Syracuse; $2,000,000 for the 
Education and Research Consortium (ERC) of Western NC 
environmental education effort; $250,000 for the New England 
value added wood products project; $200,000 for the NC 
Institute of Forest Biotechnology, heritage trees project; 
$250,000 for Allegheny National Forest area tourism effort; and 
$500,000 to complete the MTBE study at South Lake Tahoe. The 
funds for the ERC are for the on-going educational programs 
provided by the ERC, including the Pisgah Forest Institute, and 
for the expansion of the national earth and environmental 
education initiative in Pennsylvania and northern California; 
$500,000 of the allocation may be used by the Pisgah Forest 
Institute for purchase of supplies and equipment.
    Forest Resource Information and Analysis.--The Committee 
recommends $9,000,000 for forest resource information and 
analysis, $3,972,000 above the budget request and $4,061,000 
above the 2004 enacted level. The increase above the budget 
request is for general program delivery. These funds should be 
used in partnership with the State foresters and others to 
enhance the forest inventory and analysis program, which is 
managed within the forest research and development branch. The 
funds should be used to accelerate the inventory cycle time.
    International Program.--The Committee recommends $6,500,000 
for the international program, $1,143,000 above the request and 
$574,000 above the fiscal year 2004 funding level. The 
Committee is encouraged by the successful partnerships in the 
international program and the growing importance of maintaining 
expertise in this arena, including international support to 
counter invasive pests harming our forests and efforts to 
conserve and protect migratory species.

                         NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM

    Within the National Forest System, which covers 192 million 
acres, there are 51 Congressionally designated areas, including 
20 National recreation areas, and 7 National scenic areas. The 
NFS includes a substantial amount of the Nation's softwood 
inventory. In fiscal year 2002 over 208,000 acres of national 
forest vegetation was managed through timber sale activities, 
which produced 1.8 billion board feet of timber products. The 
NFS hosted over 211 million visits in fiscal year 2002. The NFS 
includes over 133,000 miles of trails and 25,000 developed 
facilities, including 4,389 campgrounds, 58 major visitor 
centers, and about one-half of the Nation's ski-lift capacity. 
Wilderness areas cover 35 million acres, nearly two-thirds of 
the wilderness in the contiguous 48 States. The Forest Service 
also has major habitat management responsibilities for more 
than 3,000 species of wildlife and fish, and 10,000 plant 
species and provides important habitat and open space for over 
422 threatened or endangered species. Half of the Nation's big 
game habitat and coldwater fish habitat, including salmon and 
steelhead, is located on National forest system lands and 
waters. In addition, in the 16 western States, where the water 
supply is sometimes critically short, about 55 percent of the 
total annual yield of water is from National forest system 
lands.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................    $1,365,877,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................     1,655,837,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................     1,399,599,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       +33,722,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................      -256,238,000


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


    The Committee recommends $1,399,599,000 for the National 
forest system, $10,000,000 above the budget request if the 
requested transfer of funding of $266,238,000 for the hazardous 
fuels program (which is rejected by the Committee) is not 
counted. The request proposed moving the hazardous fuels 
program from wildland fire management to this account. The 
Committee recommendation is $33,722,000 above the 2004 funding 
level. The Committee has not transferred the hazardous fuels 
program into this account because better oversight of the total 
national fire plan activities will result by continuing 
existing procedures, and retaining the same budget structure as 
that maintained in the Department of the Interior. The 
Committee expects close coordination of all fire plan 
activities among the various branches of the Forest Service and 
the Department of the Interior, and the Committee expects to 
see common project priority setting methods as well. All funds 
requested for the healthy forests initiative are included.
    Land Management Planning.--The Committee recommends 
$64,057,000 for land management planning, $5,000,000 above the 
budget request and $5,938,000 below the 2004 level. The 
Committee expects that new planning regulations will be 
implemented during fiscal year 2005 and that this should allow 
some cost savings. The increase above the request is for 
general program delivery.
    Inventory and Monitoring.--The Committee recommends 
$170,045,000 for inventory and monitoring, $21,300,000 below 
the budget request and $386,000 above the 2004 level. Absent a 
well reasoned and clear plan for the use of this funding, the 
Committee is not prepared to provide the large increase 
requested.
    Recreation, Heritage and Wilderness.--The Committee 
recommends $262,344,000 for recreation heritage and wilderness, 
$5,000,000 above the budget request and $7,294,000 above the 
2004 level. Within the increase, the Committee has included 
$250,000 for the National Forests in North Carolina above the 
base funding for the conservation education program at the 
Cradle of Forestry in America. The remainder of the increase 
above the request is for general program delivery.
    Wildlife and Fish Habitat Management.--The Committee 
recommends $136,522,000 for wildlife and fish habitat 
management, an increase of $2,000,000 above the budget request 
and $839,000 above the 2004 level. The increase above the 
request is for general program delivery.
    Grazing Management.--The Committee recommends $45,422,000 
for grazing management, $2,000,000 above the budget request and 
$477,000 below the 2004 funding level. The increase above the 
request is for general program delivery.
    Forest Products.--The Committee recommends $274,597,000 for 
forest products, $300,000 above the budget request and 
$9,584,000 above the 2004 funding level. The increase above the 
request is to increase the base program on the National Forests 
in North Carolina.
    The Committee encourages the Forest Service to use the 
expanded stewardship end-result contracting authority as an 
important tool to help manage and improve forestland. As the 
Forest Service expands this implementation, it should keep 
track of these projects and report regularly to the Congress. 
The Forest Service should also include provisions for 
independent, outside, second party monitoring. The Committee 
notes that only $2,000,000 worth of healthy forests initiative 
related work was anticipated for fiscal year 2005 by the 
Administration. This is disappointing. The Committee expects 
that more activity should result from stewardship contracting. 
Some of the large funding increase provided for forest products 
above the fiscal year 2004 enacted level should be used to 
facilitate this goal.
    Vegetation and Watershed Management.--The Committee 
recommends $194,335,000 for vegetation and watershed management 
as requested and $646,000 above the 2004 funding level. This 
allocation includes, within available funds, $1,000,000 each to 
continue priority forest improvement on the Colville NF, WA and 
watershed recovery work on the Wayne NF, OH. These allocations 
should be deducted from the national total for this program and 
not result in reductions to these forests or regions in this or 
any other program.
    Minerals and Geology Management.--The Committee recommends 
$59,532,000 for minerals and geology management, as requested, 
an increase of $6,133,000 above the 2004 funding level.
    Land Ownership Management.--The Committee recommends 
$94,427,000 for land ownership management, $2,000,000 above the 
budget request and $2,877,000 above the 2004 funding level. The 
Committee expects the Forest Service to maintain the full-time 
lands team to work on the Pacific Crest Trail project and other 
similar projects. The increase above the request is for general 
program delivery.
    Law Enforcement Operations.--The Committee recommends 
$87,326,000 for law enforcement operations, $5,000,000 above 
the budget request and $4,498,000 above the 2004 funding level. 
This funding allocation includes a total of $1,000,000 for 
anti-drug activities on the Daniel Boone National Forest, KY, 
and $400,000 for work on the Mark Twain NF, MO. The remainder 
of the increase above the request is for general program 
delivery. The Committee encourages the Forest Service to fund 
law enforcement program indirect costs and contributions to 
cost pools the same as other NFS activities as soon as 
practicable.
    Centennial of Service Challenge.--The Committee notes that 
February 2005 marks the centennial of the establishment of the 
U.S. Forest Service. There is a long and proud history of 
service to the American public including, but not limited to, 
forestry, watershed conservation, outdoor recreation, habitat 
protection, science research and development, wildfire 
management, and rural development. In honor of this centennial, 
the Committee has set aside $10,000,000 for use by the national 
forest system, along with partners, to fund cost-shared 
projects which enhance conditions of forests, watersheds, 
habitat, and recreational services to the American public. 
These funds should be used in addition to, and in a 
complimentary fashion with, the challenge cost share program 
included in the budget request. The Forest Service should 
continue to display data on these efforts in subsequent budget 
justifications.
    Other.--The Committee has provided $992,000, as requested, 
for management of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, NM, but 
notes that, if there are specific infrastructure needs, such 
funding should be requested under the capital improvement and 
maintenance appropriation and compete with other Forest Service 
projects.
    The Committee recommendation includes the full funding 
requested by the Administration for the Quincy Library Group 
project in California.

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................    $1,947,041,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................     1,428,886,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................     1,734,865,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................      -212,176,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................      +305,979,000


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


    The Committee recommends $1,734,865,000 for wildland fire 
management. This is $39,741,000 above the budget request once 
the hazardous fuels funding of $266,238,000 is added. Hazardous 
fuels funding was requested in the National Forest system 
account but the Committee has rejected this proposed transfer. 
The overall recommendation is $328,249,000 above the 2004 
funding level not counting the $299,224,000 in emergency 
suppression funds which were provided in fiscal year 2004 to 
repay partially previous emergency fire suppression 
expenditures and the $24,853,000 in emergency funds provided 
for southern California hazardous fuels and rehabilitation 
work.
    The Committee recommendation supports the direction 
provided by the national fire plan and the healthy forests 
initiative. All funds requested for the healthy forests 
initiative are included. In addition, funds are provided for 
other essential national fire plan related activities which 
suffered reductions in the request, including forest health 
management, State fire assistance, the joint fire science 
program, fire plan research and development, and restoration 
and rehabilitation. The fire suppression operations program is 
provided the 10-year average, $658,000,000, an increase of 
$60,870,000 above the fiscal year 2004 base program. The 
Committee also notes that, pursuant to the budget resolution 
for 2005, a special allocation of $400,000,000 for fire 
suppression operations is provided in Title IV. These funds 
will be available if the fire season is extreme, regular 
funding is exhausted, and certain cost containment procedures 
are implemented.
    Wildfire Preparedness.--The Committee recommends 
$693,627,000 for wildfire management preparedness, an increase 
of $27,400,000 above the budget request and $22,006,000 above 
the enacted level. The increase above the request is for 
general program delivery. The Committee understands that it is 
imperative to maintain firefighting readiness so that initial 
attack has a greater chance of putting fires out while they are 
small, less destructive, and less expensive to suppress. 
Accordingly, the Committee has realigned some of the fire 
suppression funding into the preparedness activity in order to 
help prevent run-away, large fire incidents, which command so 
much emergency funding and are so destructive to the 
environment, property, and lives.
    The Committee is concerned that the allocation of funds 
between preparedness and suppression operations may not 
maintain the levels of readiness needed for public safety that 
were established in fiscal years 2002 and 2003. The Committee 
believes that decisive action is necessary to manage escalating 
fire suppression costs. An important component of reducing such 
costs is maintaining initial attack capability so that more 
fires can be contained before they escape and cause serious 
loss of life and property as well as natural resource damage. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Forest Service to 
analyze current readiness levels to determine whether 
maintaining preparedness resources in the field at a level not 
less than that established in fiscal year 2003 will, based on 
the best information available, result in lower overall 
firefighting costs. If the Forest Service makes such a 
determination, the Committee directs the Forest Service to 
adjust the levels for preparedness and suppression funding 
accordingly and report on these adjustments to the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations. The Secretary of 
Agriculture should advise the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations in writing prior to its decision.
    Wildfire Suppression Operations.--The Committee recommends 
$658,000,000 for wildfire suppression operations, which is 
equal to the ten-year average cost of wildfire suppression. 
This amount is $27,400,000 below the budget request but an 
increase of $60,870,000 above the non-emergency funding for 
this activity in fiscal year 2004.
    The Committee remains concerned about rising suppression 
costs and the lack of incentives to consider costs during large 
fire incidents. The Forest Service, along with the Department 
of the Interior, should ensure that cost containment is an 
important priority when suppressing wildland fires. Therefore, 
the Committee directs the Forest Service and the Department of 
the Interior to continue reports directed in fiscal years 2003 
and 2004.
    The Committee agrees with instructions in the 
Administration's budget appendix covering fire operations, but 
directs the Forest Service not to implement the instruction 
regarding immediate allocation of half the suppression funds 
and allowing unobligated suppression funds to be retained at a 
region. The Committee insists that a national, 
interdepartmental approach, with full cooperation of State and 
other partners, is needed to improve the fire program. The 
cooperative spirit would be disrupted by pitting region against 
region as instructed in the budget appendix.
    Hazardous Fuels.--The Committee has provided $266,238,000 
for hazardous fuels reduction work, equal to the budget request 
(which was in the NFS account) and an increase of $32,758,000 
above the non-emergency funds provided in fiscal year 2004 
level. The Committee believes that the hazardous fuels funding 
should remain in the wildland fire management account to 
maintain accountability and continuity with previous years as 
well as with similar work in the Department of the Interior. 
The Committee expects that the urgent and dangerous situation 
on the San Bernardino NF, CA, and surrounding areas, caused by 
drought and a catastrophic bark beetle outbreak, will be a top 
priority for allocation of fuels funding. The overall 
allocation also continues the previous funding of $5,000,000 
for the Community Forest Restoration Act and up to $15,000,000 
for use on adjacent non-Federal lands when hazard reduction 
activities are planned on national forest system lands.
    The Committee has provided the requested funds for the 
hazardous fuels program but wants to ensure that these funds 
are used to address the highest priority fuels projects. The 
Committee requests the Forest Service to provide the Committees 
on Appropriations a summary of hazardous fuels projects planned 
for fiscal year 2005 with information on the major vegetative 
cover type and the type of treatment by December 31, 2004. 
Included in this report, the Forest Service, in conjunction 
with the Department of the Interior, should detail the methods 
used to prioritize fuels projects. A common project 
prioritization method should be used by both departments to 
assure the American public that all funds, regardless of 
funding source, are used for the highest priority fuels 
reduction projects.
    Rehabilitation.--The Committee has restored $13,000,000 for 
the burned area rehabilitation and restoration program, 
$10,000,000 above the budget request and $6,086,000 above the 
enacted funding level. The Committee expects the Forest 
Service, in close partnership with the Department of the 
Interior, to continue the native plant program with at least 
$2,000,000. The remainder of the increase above the request is 
for general program delivery.
    Fire Plan Research and Development.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $23,000,000 for research and 
development, $3,639,000 above the budget request and $975,000 
above the enacted funding level. The increase above the request 
is for general program delivery.
    Joint Fire Sciences Program.--The Committee has provided 
$8,000,000 for the joint fire science program, $99,000 above 
the enacted level. Although budget documents were not clear, it 
appears that the Administration requested this amount of 
funding for this program within the preparedness activity. This 
program is producing important scientific and technical 
information, often in collaboration with the Nation's forestry 
schools, that is needed to support the large effort concerning 
hazardous fuels and other fire management issues.
    Forest Health Management, Federal Lands and Co-op Lands.--
The Committee has provided $25,000,000 for the forest health 
portion of the national fire plan, including $15,000,000 for 
Federal lands and $10,000,000 for cooperative efforts with the 
States and others. This funding level is $12,347,000 above the 
request and $308,000 above the enacted level. The increase 
above the request is for general program delivery. This funding 
should be used in conjunction with the similar funding in State 
and private forestry to continue the more integrated approach 
to forest health, including prevention, and restoration and 
rehabilitation of forests and rangelands. The Committee expects 
the Forest Service to focus on major problems, such as southern 
pine beetles, western mountain bark beetles, adelgids, and 
other pests and pathogens, which harm forests and subsequently 
increase wildfire hazards. This work is an essential part of 
the national fire plan, and is vital to the success of the 
healthy forests initiative as well.
    State and Volunteer Fire Assistance.--The Committee has 
provided $40,000,000 for State fire assistance, $5,755,000 
above the request and $11,063,000 below the enacted level. The 
increase above the request is for general program delivery. 
This funding is in addition to the $36,384,000 provided under 
the State and private forestry heading. The Committee expects 
that funds will be used to support and expand the Fire Safe 
Councils in California and that the Forest Service will use 
this innovative program as a model for other States. State fire 
assistance funds should also be used preferentially to support 
community wildfire protection planning. The Committee supports 
expansion of the Firewise program. The Committee has also 
included $8,000,000 for volunteer fire assistance, as 
requested. This brings the volunteer fire funding to a total of 
$13,443,000.

                  CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $555,227,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       501,059,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       522,940,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -32,287,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       +21,881,000


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


    The Committee recommends $522,940,000 for capital 
improvement and maintenance, $21,881,000 above the request and 
$32,287,000 below enacted level. The Committee expects to 
continue to receive regular updates, and a continued display in 
the budget justification, on progress in addressing the huge 
backlog of deferred maintenance and repair, especially as it 
relates to the activities funded through the road and trails 
fund, the pilot conveyance authority and the infrastructure 
improvement funds.
    Facilities.--The Committee recommends $196,355,000 for 
facilities maintenance and capital improvement, $5,017,000 
above the budget request and $18,011,000 below the fiscal year 
2004 level. The Committee has fully funded the request for 
facility maintenance. The Committee has funded the capital 
improvement request but no funding is provided for the ANM/JRD 
collocated administrative site, AK. The remainder of the 
funding includes: $1,800,000 for recreation and administrative 
projects on the Allegheny NF, PA; $600,000 for recreation 
improvements on the Daniel Boone NF, KY; $4,000,000 for 
projects on the National Forests of North Carolina; $900,000 
for Cherokee NF, TN recreation projects; and $2,000,000 for San 
Bernardino NF, CA recreational infrastructure projects.
    The Committee encourages the Department of the Interior and 
the Forest Service to work jointly to secure funding under the 
Southern Nevada Land Management Act to construct the Tahoe 
Mountain Lake Research Center at Fallen Leaf Lake near Lake 
Tahoe. This center is listed in the Lake Tahoe Environmental 
Improvement Plan. The Committee also expects that a process 
will be developed to routinely transfer funds for environmental 
improvement projects at Lake Tahoe to the Forest Service from 
the Bureau of Land Management, as authorized by amendments to 
the act mentioned above. Furthermore, the Committee notes that 
it is important to use the Act to maintain funding for Forest 
Service land improvement activities and water quality 
protection in the Lake Tahoe Basin, as well as for erosion 
control grants within the Lake Tahoe watershed.
    Roads.--The Committee recommends $227,906,000 for road 
maintenance and capital improvement, equal to the budget 
request and $6,632,000 below the fiscal year 2004 level. The 
Committee has maintained the road decommissioning authority at 
$15,000,000.
    Trails.--The Committee recommends $76,774,000 for trails 
maintenance and capital improvement, $4,983,000 above the 
budget request and $2,056,000 above the fiscal year 2004 level. 
The recommendation funds the budget request for operations and 
construction, and provides increases above the budget request 
of $500,000 for construction and $500,000 for operations at the 
Florida National Scenic Trail, $1,000,000 for construction and 
$500,000 for operations at the Continental Divide trail, and 
$1,000,000 for construction and $500,000 for operations at the 
Pacific Crest National Scenic trail. Increases above the 
request for operations includes $75,000 for the Appalachian 
trail, $400,000 for the Nez Perce trail, $75,000 for the North 
Country trail, and $433,000 for other named national scenic and 
historic trails. The remainder of the increase above the 
request is for general program delivery. In addition, the 
Forest Service should maintain a full time Pacific Crest Trail 
(PCT) manager; provide funds to work with the Pacific Crest 
Trail Association; and aid PCT trail relocation reviews. The 
Forest Service should make every effort to work with volunteer 
groups, which contribute work, time, and money to enhance 
Federal resources.
    Infrastructure Improvement.--The Committee recommends 
$21,905,000 for infrastructure improvement, $11,881,000 above 
the budget request and $9,700,000 below the fiscal year 2004 
enacted level. This includes $17,905,000 for deferred 
maintenance and $4,000,000 to continue the program to help 
remediate salmonid fish passage problems at road crossings. 
This funding should be allocated for priority projects in 
regions 6 and 5, and activities should be coordinated with 
States, other Federal agencies, watershed councils, and others 
to help determine priority projects.

                            LAND ACQUISITION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $66,363,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        66,885,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        15,500,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -50,863,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -51,385,000


    The Committee recommends $15,500,000 for land acquisition, 
a decrease of $51,385,000 below the budget request and 
$50,863,000 below the enacted level. This amount includes 
$13,000,000 for acquisition management, $1,000,000 for cash 
equalization, and $1,500,000 for inholdings.

         ACQUISITION OF LANDS FOR NATIONAL FORESTS SPECIAL ACTS




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $1,056,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         1,069,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         1,069,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................           +13,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


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

            ACQUISITION OF LANDS TO COMPLETE LAND EXCHANGES




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................          $231,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................           234,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................           234,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................            +3,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


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

                         RANGE BETTERMENT FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $2,963,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         3,064,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         3,064,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +101,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $3,064,000, as requested, for the 
range betterment fund, to be derived from grazing receipts from 
the National forests (Public Law 94-579, as amended) and to be 
used for range rehabilitation, protection, and improvements 
including seeding, reseeding, fence construction, weed control, 
water development, and fish and wildlife habitat enhancement in 
16 western States.

    GIFTS, DONATIONS AND BEQUESTS FOR FOREST AND RANGELAND RESEARCH




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................           $90,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................            65,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................            65,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................           -25,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $65,000, the budget estimate, for 
gifts, donations and bequests for forest and rangeland 
research. Authority for the program is contained in Public Law 
95-307 (16 U.S.C. 1643, section 4(b)). Amounts appropriated and 
not needed for current operations may be invested in public 
debt securities. Both the principal and earnings from the 
receipts are available to the Forest Service.

        MANAGEMENT OF NATIONAL FOREST LANDS FOR SUBSISTENCE USES




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $5,467,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         5,962,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         5,962,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +495,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $5,962,000, the same as the budget 
request and $495,000 above the enacted level, for the 
management of national forest lands for subsistence uses in 
Alaska.

               ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS, FOREST SERVICE

    The Committee has continued administrative provisions 
contained in previous years. The Committee has also continued 
the wildland fire transfer authority, which allows use of funds 
from other accounts available to the Forest Service during 
wildfire emergencies when other wildfire emergency funds are 
not available. As was the case last year, the first transfer of 
funds into the wildland fire management account shall include 
unobligated funds from the land acquisition and the forest 
legacy accounts. The Committee recommendation also includes the 
language requested by the Administration canceling $40,000,000 
in mandatory funding from the 2002 Farm Bill for the forest 
land enhancement program. The Committee notes that it has 
provided substantial increases above the request for other 
important forestry programs, including increases in State and 
private forestry and wildland fire management of $44,091,000 
for forest health management programs and $22,077,000 for State 
fire assistance, as well as $4,972,000 above the request for 
the forest inventory and analysis program.
    The Committee limits funding for the working capital fund 
of the Department of Agriculture to the $72,467,000 requested 
in the budget. The Committee continues the authority for 
transfers to the National Forest Foundation and the National 
Fish and Wildlife Foundation. The Committee has provided new 
authority to allow an extra $300,000 to be used by the National 
Forest Foundation for activities related to the Forest Service 
centennial. The Committee allows $350,000 in administrative 
funds to be used by the National Forest Foundation. The 
authority allowing reimbursements for Endangered Species Act 
consultations has been extended for five years.
    The Committee remains very concerned about how the Forest 
Service has implemented the ``Competitive Sourcing'' 
initiative. The Committee has looked into this issue in detail 
and found a number of cases of mismanagement of this effort. 
Accordingly, this issue is addressed once again in bill 
language, included under Title III--General Provisions, 
limiting the use of funds for competitive sourcing efforts and 
providing certain other guidance. The new language will allow 
competitive sourcing efforts to continue, but limit the cost to 
$2,000,000. More importantly, language is included in Title III 
which recognizes that past mistakes have been made and obviates 
the Forest Service from continuing expensive monitoring and 
recompeting previous sourcing efforts, which should have never 
been contemplated.
    The Committee recognizes that the Forest Service is engaged 
in two large efforts to improve administrative functions 
through detailed and expensive business process reengineering 
of financial services and human resources. The Committee 
supports efforts to improve in these areas, but it is concerned 
that the efforts may not be adequately documented and open to 
public scrutiny. Therefore, the Committee directs the Forest 
Service to provide quarterly reports on business process 
reengineering efforts and to provide a detailed blueprint, 
schedule, and funding proposal for these efforts by November 1, 
2004. The Committee expects the Forest Service, working closely 
with the Department of Agriculture, to provide adequate 
Congressional notification at key benchmarks in these 
processes, and directs the Forest Service to document the 
funding requirements and accomplishments in subsequent budget 
justifications.
    The Committee has carefully evaluated the KV reforestation 
fund and finds that this program has considerable merit in the 
field, but that it suffers from a lack of consistent policies 
and inadequate financial management and reporting. Additional 
language is included in Title III clarifying treatment of KV 
funds. The Committee also directs the Forest Service to 
establish, during fiscal year 2005, a comprehensive financial 
tracking and management system for KV funds and provide a plan, 
schedule, and cost predictions as part of the next budget 
justification.
    The Committee has recommended bill language, in the Title 
III--General Provisions, prohibiting the use of funds for 
Safecom, Disaster Management, E-Training, and E-Rulemaking 
activities. Funds requested for these activities should be 
reprogrammed to cover equitably fixed cost increases not funded 
in the budget request.

                          DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


                         CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY

                               (DEFERRAL)

    The Committee recommends the deferral of $237,000,000 in 
clean coal technology funding until fiscal year 2006. These 
funds are to be used for costs associated with the FutureGen 
program in fiscal year 2006 and beyond.
    The Committee also recommends bill language incorporating 
the FutureGen program into the Clean Coal Technology program 
and permitting the use of up to $18,000,000 in previously 
appropriated Clean Coal Technology funds for FutureGen in 
fiscal year 2005.
    Future budget requests should include a table detailing the 
history of funding for the FutureGen program. In fiscal year 
2004, $9,000,000 was made available in the Fossil Energy 
Research and Development appropriation to start the program. In 
fiscal year 2005, the Committee recommends the use of up to 
$18,000,000 in prior year Clean Coal Technology funds for 
FutureGen and the deferral of $237,000,000 in Clean Coal 
Technology funds for future FutureGen requirements (for a total 
commitment of $264,000,000 in Federal funding). In addition, 
the Committee understands that future budgets will include 
increases in the Fossil Energy Research and Development 
sequestration program for FutureGen. The balance of the Federal 
funding commitment to FutureGen will need to be identified in 
future budgets.

                 FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

    Fossil energy research and development programs make 
prudent investments in long-range research and development that 
help protect the environment through higher efficiency power 
generation, advanced technologies and improved compliance and 
stewardship operations. These activities safeguard our domestic 
energy security. This country will continue to rely on 
traditional fuels for the majority of its energy requirements 
for the foreseeable future, and the activities funded through 
this account ensure that energy technologies continue to 
improve with respect to emissions reductions and control and 
energy efficiency.
    Fossil fuels, especially coal, are this country's most 
abundant and lowest cost fuels for electric power generation. 
They are why this country enjoys the lowest cost electricity of 
any industrialized economy. The prospects for technology 
advances for coal and other fossil fuels are just as bright as 
those for alternative energy sources such as solar, wind, and 
geothermal. The power generation technology research funded 
under this account has the goal of developing virtually 
pollution-free power plants within the next 15 or 20 years and 
doubling the amount of electricity produced from the same 
amount of fuel.
    The Committee, in large part, rejects the fiscal year 2005 
budget request for fossil energy research and development 
because it would provide $237,000,000 for the FutureGen program 
at the expense of most of the ongoing fossil energy research 
programs. The Committee has addressed the FutureGen program 
under the Clean Coal Technology account.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $672,770,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       635,799,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       601,875,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       -70,895,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -33,924,000


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


    The Committee recommends $601,875,000 for fossil energy 
research and development, a decrease of $70,895,000 below the 
fiscal year 2004 level and $33,924,000 below the budget 
request. Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
    Clean Coal Power Initiative.--The Committee recommends 
$105,000,000 to restore partially funding for the clean coal 
power initiative, an increase of $55,000,000 above the budget 
request and $64,881,000 below the fiscal year 2004 level. The 
Committee believes that at this funding level the second round 
of projects, for which the solicitation has already been 
issued, will have adequate funding to maintain a robust 
program. Also, this funding level will significantly shorten 
any delay in achieving the program goals, articulated by the 
President, for a 10-year, $2 billion program. Fiscal year 2005 
will be the 4th year of that program.
    FutureGen.--The Committee recommends no funding in this 
account for the FutureGen initiative, a decrease of 
$237,000,000 below the budget request. The FutureGen program is 
addressed under the Clean Coal Technology account.
    Fuels and Power Systems.--The Committee recommends 
$276,676,000 for fuels and power systems, an increase of 
$93,676,000 above the budget request and $4,963,000 above the 
fiscal year 2004 level. Within central systems, increases for 
advanced systems include $14,000,000 for gasification systems 
technology, $4,500,000 for gas stream cleanup under the 
combustion systems program, and $3,600,000 for the next 
generation turbines program.
    In sequestration research, there is a decrease of 
$3,000,000.
    In fuels research, there is an increase of $5,300,000 to 
restore the syngas membrane technology program under 
transportation fuels and chemicals. In solid fuels and 
feedstocks, increases include $1,000,000 for premium carbon 
products, $3,000,000 for advanced separation technology, and 
$2,000,000 for coal-derived jet fuels. In advanced fuels 
research, there is an increase of $3,300,000, which includes 
$2,000,000 for the C-1 chemistry program.
    In advanced research, there are increases of $4,800,000 for 
coal utilization science and $3,000,000 to restore the 
materials program.
    In distributed generation systems, increases include 
$10,376,000 for advanced research (the budget request 
eliminated this program), $5,700,000 to restore partially the 
systems development program, $5,100,000 to restore partially 
the vision 21-hybrids program and to transition the tubular 
solid oxide program into one of the existing projects in the 
solid state energy alliance. There is also an increase of 
$27,000,000 in innovative concepts to restore funding for the 
solid-state energy conversion alliance. SECA was funded in 
various line items in the fiscal year 2004 appropriation and 
the Committee has consolidated all SECA funding in the 
innovative concepts program for fiscal year 2005. In novel 
generation, there is an increase of $3,000,000 for the Ramgen 
technology program.
    U.S./China Energy and Environmental Center.--The Committee 
recommends $1,000,000 to restore funding for the U.S./China 
energy and environmental center. The budget request proposed to 
eliminate this program.
    Natural Gas Technologies.--The Committee recommends 
$41,600,000 for natural gas technologies, an increase of 
$15,600,000 above the budget request and $1,394,000 below the 
fiscal year 2004 level. There is an increase of $5,000,000 to 
restore the exploration and production program. In gas 
hydrates, there is an increase of $3,500,000 to restore 
critical research on methane hydrates. In natural gas 
infrastructure, there is an increase of $7,100,000 to fund 
ongoing projects.
    Oil Technology.--The Committee recommends $34,700,000 for 
oil technology, an increase of $19,700,000 above the budget 
request and $378,000 below the fiscal year 2004 level. There is 
an increase of $15,000,000 to restore exploration and 
production supporting research programs, including $1,000,000 
for cooperative research with Russia. There is an increase of 
$2,000,000 to restore the reservoir life extension program. 
There is also an increase of $2,700,000 to restore the 
effective environmental protection program.
    Other.--The Committee recommends increases of $4,335,000 
for cooperative research and development, $4,600,000 for fossil 
energy environmental restoration, $7,000,000 for plant and 
capital equipment of which $3,000,000 is for projects at the 
Albany Research Center and $4,000,000 is to continue the 
National Energy Technology Laboratory renovation program, 
$2,000,000 for advanced metallurgical research, $665,000 for 
special recruitment programs, and $500,000 to restore funding 
for National Academy of Sciences program reviews.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. FutureGen is addressed under the Clean Coal Technology 
account. The Committee understands that the sequestration 
research and development portion of FutureGen will be funded 
under the Fossil Energy Research and Development sequestration 
program. The Committee cautions the Department not to ``count'' 
general increases to the sequestration budget as FutureGen. 
Specific sequestration projects that are integral to the 
FutureGen program should be identified as such in both the 
overall industry/government plan and in future budget requests 
for the sequestration program.
    2. Oil and natural gas research is critical to improving 
current technology and ensuring the best use of our domestic 
oil and gas reserves. Despite the Committee's urging to the 
contrary, these research areas continue to be seriously 
underfunded in annual budget requests.
    3. The fiscal year 2005 budget request for stationary fuel 
cells is totally inadequate. The Department should recognize 
the synergies between stationary and transportation fuel cells 
and budget more generously for stationary fuel cell programs. 
Stationary fuel cells still have many obstacles to overcome 
before they can be expected to achieve any appreciable market 
penetration and experience with these fuel cells will benefit 
the transportation fuel cell program.
    4. No more than $20,000,000 is to be spent on the SECA core 
technology program and the remaining $30,000,000 should be 
divided equally among the participating teams.
    5. Several programs funded in the energy conservation 
account need to be closely coordinated with fossil energy 
programs so that the highest priority energy research projects 
are funded. They include the cooperative programs with States, 
the mining industry of the future program, the industrial 
gasification program, and the reciprocating engines program.
    6. The funding for special recruitment programs is to 
attract highly qualified students to pursue Federal energy 
careers and to increase diversity in the fossil energy 
workforce. The Office of Fossil Energy has been assessing 
programs to pay for a Technical Career Intern Program and to 
participate in the Mickey Leland Energy Fellowship Program with 
minority educational institutions. The Committee believes that 
these recruitment programs should be funded directly and not 
through assessments on other programs. The Committee has added 
a line item to the budget for that purpose. It includes 
$165,000 for the Technical Career Intern Program and $500,000 
for the Mickey Leland Energy Fellowship Program. These programs 
should be continued under this budget line item in the future. 
The Committee suggests that the Technical Career Intern Program 
be increased to $340,000 in fiscal year 2006 and that the 
Mickey Leland Energy Fellowship Program continue at the 
$500,000 level in fiscal year 2006.
    7. The $500,000 for the National Academy of Sciences review 
of programs should remain in the base for a continuing annual 
review by the Academy of programs, using the Academy's matrix, 
to measure the relative benefits expected to be achieved and to 
inform decision making on what programs should be continued, 
expanded, scaled-back, or eliminated.
    8. The fossil energy reorganization proposal is approved.

                 NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES

    The Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves are managed by 
the Department of Energy to achieve the greatest value and 
benefit to the Government. In fiscal year 1998, NPR-1 (Elk 
Hills) was sold as mandated by the National Defense 
Authorization Act for fiscal year 1996. That Act also directed 
the Department to conduct a study of the remaining properties--
3 Naval Oil Shale Reserves and NPR-2 and NPR-3. The National 
Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1998 directed the 
transfer of two of the oil shale reserves (NOSR-1 and NOSR-3) 
to the Department of the Interior. On January 14, 2000, the 
Department announced it would return a portion of the NOSR-2 
property in Utah to the Ute Indian Tribe. Two properties remain 
under the jurisdiction of the Department of Energy. They are 
NPR-2 in Kern County, CA and NPR-3 in Natrona County, WY. The 
DOE continues to be responsible for routine operation and 
maintenance of NPR-3, management of the Rocky Mountain Oilfield 
Testing Center at NPR-3, lease management at NPR-2, and 
continuing environmental and remediation work at Elk Hills. For 
several years after the sale of Elk Hills, these programs were 
operated largely with prior year unobligated balances. Those 
balances were mostly exhausted by fiscal year 2003 and 
appropriations to the account were restored in that year.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $17,995,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        18,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        18,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................            +5,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $18,000,000, the budget request, 
for the operation of the naval petroleum and oil shale 
reserves, an increase of $5,000 above the fiscal year 2004 
level. Within the amount provided, $3,000,000 is for the Rocky 
Mountain Oilfield Testing Center.

                      ELK HILLS SCHOOL LANDS FUND

    Payment to the Elk Hills school lands fund was part of the 
settlement associated with the sale of Naval Petroleum Reserve 
Number 1. Under the settlement, payments to the fund are to be 
made over a period of seven years.
    The Committee recommends $36,000,000 for the Elk Hills 
school lands fund, which is equal to amount available for 
fiscal year 2004. The Committee recommends that these funds be 
made available on October 1, 2005, rather than on October 1, 
2004 as proposed in the budget. The Committee's recommendation 
is consistent with the payment of these funds in each of the 
past few years. This represents the seventh of seven payments 
to the fund, which was established as a part of the sale of the 
Elk Hills Naval Petroleum Reserve in California (to settle 
school lands claims by the State). However, the payments to 
date were based on an estimate of the amount that would be 
required to pay the State of California 9 percent of the net 
sales proceeds. The final amount due will be based on the 
resolution of equity determinations and is expected to be more 
than the amount made available in these seven payments.

                          ENERGY CONSERVATION

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $877,985,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       584,733,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       656,071,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................      -221,914,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       +71,338,000


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


    The Committee recommends $656,071,000 for energy 
conservation, an increase of $5,386,000 above the fiscal year 
2004 level after adjusting for the weatherization program as 
explained below, and $71,338,000 above the budget request. 
Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
    Vehicle Technologies.--The Committee recommends 
$167,356,000 for vehicle technologies. In the hybrid and 
electric propulsion/energy storage program, there is a decrease 
of $5,000,000 for exploratory technology. In the advanced 
combustion engine program, increases include $6,700,000 for 
combustion and emissions control including homogeneous charge 
combustion ignition research, $1,400,000 for heavy truck engine 
research, and $3,500,000 to restore the off-highway engine 
program.
    In the materials technology program, there is a decrease of 
$4,000,000 for automotive lightweight materials and an increase 
of $2,600,000 for the high temperature materials laboratory.
    In the fuels technology program, there is an increase of 
$3,000,000 for advanced petroleum-based fuels and increases for 
non-petroleum fuels and lubes of $1,300,000 for medium trucks, 
$1,400,000 for heavy trucks, and $1,200,000 for fueling 
infrastructure, and a decrease of $2,400,000 for renewable and 
synthetic fuels. There is also an increase of $2,000,000 for 
the environmental impacts program.
    In technology introduction, there is a decrease of 
$1,000,000 for legislative and rulemaking activities.
    Fuel Cell Technologies.--The Committee recommends 
$71,000,000 for fuel cell technologies, including an increase 
of $1,500,000 for stack component research on catalysts and 
decreases of $4,000,000 for other stack component research and 
$4,000,000 for fuel processor research.
    Intergovernmental Activities.--The Committee recommends 
$84,667,000 for intergovernmental activities, including a 
decrease of $291,200,000 for weatherization assistance grants, 
training, and technical assistance. The jurisdiction for the 
weatherization program has been moved to the Subcommittee on 
Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related 
Agencies, which has jurisdiction for the Low Income Home Energy 
Assistance Program that also includes funding for 
weatherization. There is an increase of $4,300,000 for State 
energy programs. In gateway deployment, increases include 
$1,000,000 for rebuild America, $2,000,000 for building codes 
training and assistance, $4,000,000 for the clean cities 
program, and $1,500,000 for the inventions and innovations 
program. There is also a decrease of $1,000,000 for the energy 
star program.
    Distributed Energy Resources.--The Committee recommends 
$62,480,000 for distributed energy resources, including 
increases of $5,000,000 for advanced reciprocating engines, 
$1,000,000 for advanced materials and sensors, $2,400,000 for 
thermally activated technology, and $1,000,000 for applications 
integration to promote fuel flexibility in distributed 
generation systems, specifically the use of hydrogen in fuel 
cells, engines, and turbines.
    Building Technologies.--The Committee recommends 
$64,884,000 for building technologies. In residential buildings 
integration, there is a decrease of $3,000,000 for residential 
buildings research (formerly Building America) and an increase 
of $500,000 for residential building energy codes. In 
commercial buildings integration, there is an increase of 
$500,000 for commercial buildings energy codes. In emerging 
technologies, increases include $1,000,000 for solid state 
lighting, $2,400,000 for space conditioning and refrigeration, 
and $3,200,000 for building envelope research/thermal 
insulation and building materials. There is also an increase of 
$2,000,000 in equipment and analysis for appliance standards.
    Industrial Technologies.--The Committee recommends 
$84,940,000 for industrial technologies, including increases of 
$24,838,000 to restore each of the industry of the future 
(specific) programs to the fiscal year 2004 level and 
$2,000,000 in the industries of the future (crosscutting) 
program to restore funding for the program on robotics to 
replace repetitive manufacturing tasks.
    Biomass and Biorefinery Systems.--The Committee recommends 
$12,680,000 for biomass and biorefinery systems, including an 
increase of $5,000,000 to restore gasification programs and a 
decrease of $1,000,000 for utilization of platform outputs.
    Federal Energy Management Program.--The Committee 
recommends $17,900,000, the budget request, for the Federal 
energy management program.
    Program Management.--The Committee recommends $90,164,000 
for program management, including increases of $500,000 for 
National Academy of Sciences program reviews, $3,000,000 for 
cooperative programs on technology transfer from National 
Laboratories with the Education and Research Consortium of the 
Western Carolinas, $5,000,000 for cooperative programs with 
States.
    Bill Language.--Bill Language is recommended earmarking 
$227,300,000 for weatherization and $44,798,000 for State 
energy programs. These levels are slightly above the fiscal 
year 2004 levels for those programs.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Committee continues to expect that administrative 
savings should be achieved and several positions should be 
eliminated as a result of the consolidation of budget and 
administration functions in the 2002 reorganization. The 
Department should work closely with NAPA and implement all of 
the NAPA recommendations.
    2. The budget justification for fiscal year 2006 should 
include the program specific table provided separately to the 
Committee for 2004. The official budget detail table should 
contain stub entries for sub-activities within each of the 
program areas. A few examples include, but are not limited to, 
each of the industries of the future (specific) and 
(crosscutting) programs, micro-cogeneration, advanced 
reciprocating engines, thermally activated technologies, and 
each of the major building, vehicle technology, and fuel cell 
areas. This direction was not fully complied with in the budget 
justification presented to the Committee for fiscal year 2005.
    3. The Department should recognize the synergies between 
stationary and transportation fuel cells and budget much more 
generously for stationary fuel cell programs. Stationary fuel 
cells still have many obstacles to overcome before they can be 
expected to achieve any appreciable market penetration. 
Experience with stationary fuel cells will benefit the 
transportation fuel cell program.
    4. The issue of starting fuel cells in freezing weather 
needs to be addressed before fuel cells for transportation can 
be successfully commercialized. The Department should request 
sufficient funding for this essential core technology research 
in its fiscal year 2006 budget.
    5. There should be a new solicitation issued for off-
highway research using the full $3,500,000 recommended by the 
Committee.
    6. Funding provided for the High Temperature Materials 
Laboratory includes $1,000,000 for a share of the cost of the 
Vulcan Beam Line.
    7. Funds for the Building America program should be 
distributed based on proven performance with respect to overall 
energy efficiency savings.
    8. The industry of the future programs should not be 
reduced further. Staffing for these programs should be 
maintained at least at the 2004 level. The Committee encourages 
the Department to reconsider seriously its funding proposals 
for these important programs in the fiscal year 2006 budget 
request.
    9. With the funds provided for the metal casting industry 
of the future program, the Department should fund competitively 
selected projects that are sponsored by consortia focused 
predominantly on small business participation, with an emphasis 
on cost-shared university-based research and technology 
transfer to industry.
    10. The State Technologies Advancement Collaborative, a 
cooperative program between the States and the Department of 
Energy, has successfully completed the first year of its 5-year 
pilot program with the award of 16 projects covering 
transportation, buildings, industry, distributed energy 
resources, and hydrogen programs. These projects are in 32 
States and are cost-shared by the States. The Committee expects 
the Department to supplement the funds provided for STAC with 
additional program funds for programs of mutual interest to DOE 
and the States in order to leverage Federal funds and reduce 
delays in program implementation.
    11. The cooperative programs with the States should be 
closely coordinated with the Fossil Energy Research and 
Development program to ensure the highest priority research 
needs across both the Fossil Energy and Energy Conservation 
accounts are addressed. The mining industry of the future 
program, the industrial gasification program, and the 
reciprocating engines program should also be coordinated 
closely with fossil energy.
    12. The $500,000 for the National Academy of Sciences 
review of programs should remain in the base for a continuing 
annual review by the Academy of programs, using the Academy's 
matrix, to measure the relative benefits expected to be 
achieved and to inform decision making on what programs should 
be continued, expanded, scaled-back, or eliminated.
    13. While jurisdiction for the weatherization program has 
been transferred to another subcommittee, the Committee notes 
that the Weatherization Assistance Program has not been 
evaluated fully in over 10 years. The Committee was pleased by 
the last evaluation, performed by Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory, and encourages the Department to contract with ORNL 
for an up-to-date assessment.

                          ECONOMIC REGULATION

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $1,034,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................                 0
Recommended, 2005.....................................                 0
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        -1,034,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends no funding, the same as the budget 
request, for economic regulation. Fiscal year 2004 was the 
final year of funding for this account, consistent with 
Committee direction on phasing out this program.

                      STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

    The Strategic Petroleum Reserve was created by the Energy 
Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 to provide the United 
States with adequate strategic and economic protection against 
disruptions in oil supplies. The SPR program was established as 
a 750 million-barrel capacity crude oil reserve with storage in 
large underground salt caverns at five sites in the Gulf Coast 
area. It is connected to major private sector distribution 
systems and maintained to achieve full drawdown rate capability 
within fifteen days of notice to proceed with drawdown. Storage 
capacity development was completed in September 1991, providing 
the capability to store 750 million barrels of crude oil in 
underground caverns and to be ready to deploy at the 
President's direction in the event of an emergency. As a result 
of the decommissioning of the Weeks Island site in 1999, the 
SPR lost 70 million barrels of capacity. However, the 
Department reassessed the capacities of the remaining storage 
sites and estimates that those sites are currently capable of 
storing a total of 700 million barrels. During 1998, an 
inventory of 561 million barrels provided 60 days of net import 
protection. In 2004, 682 million barrels provide 58 days of net 
import protection. The decline in days of net import protection 
is the result of the growth of U.S. requirements for imported 
crude oil and the decline in domestic oil production.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $170,949,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       172,100,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       172,100,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +1,151,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $172,100,000, the budget request, 
for operation of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, an increase 
of $1,151,000 above the fiscal year 2004 level.

                   NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $4,939,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         5,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         5,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................           +61,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $5,000,000, the budget request, 
for the Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve, an increase of 
$61,000 above the fiscal year 2004 level.

                   ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $81,100,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        85,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        85,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +3,900,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $85,000,000, the budget request, 
for the Energy Information Administration, an increase of 
$3,900,000 above the fiscal year 2004 level. Over the past few 
years, EIA has funded a portion of its requirements through the 
use of unobligated balances. Those balances have been exhausted 
and an increase in the budget is required in fiscal year 2005 
to fund ongoing, mission-essential programs.
    The Committee is concerned that the Energy Information 
Administration has been unable to continue its residential, 
commercial, and manufacturing energy consumption surveys on a 
timely basis. The Residential Transportation Energy Consumption 
Survey has been cancelled and the remaining end use surveys are 
now conducted only once every 4 years. At current funding 
levels, EIA may not even be able to continue that stretched out 
schedule for these important surveys. In addition, in order to 
stay within its 2005 budget, EIA will cancel one of its 
electric power surveys. The Committee encourages the Department 
to provide a sufficient budget request for EIA in fiscal year 
2006 that will ensure that the end use surveys are sufficiently 
funded to return to a 3-year cycle and to ensure that no 
additional surveys are cancelled.

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


                         Indian Health Service


                         INDIAN HEALTH SERVICES

    The provision of Federal health services to Indians is 
based on a special relationship between Indian tribes and the 
U.S. Government first set forth in the 1830s by the U.S. 
Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Marshall. Numerous 
treaties, statutes, constitutional provisions, and 
international law have reconfirmed this relationship. Principal 
among these is the Snyder Act of 1921, which provides the basic 
authority for most Indian health services provided by the 
Federal Government to American Indians and Alaska Natives. The 
Indian Health Service (IHS) provides direct health care 
services in 36 hospitals, 59 health centers, 2 school health 
centers, and 49 health stations. Tribes and tribal groups, 
through contracts and compacts with the IHS, operate 13 
hospitals, 172 health centers, 3 school health centers, and 260 
health stations (including 176 Alaska Native village clinics). 
The IHS, tribes, and tribal groups also operate 9 regional 
youth substance abuse treatment centers and 2,252 units of 
staff quarters.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................    $2,530,364,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................     2,612,824,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................     2,628,322,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       +97,958,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       +15,498,000


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


    The Committee recommends $2,628,322,000 for Indian health 
services, an increase of $15,498,000 above the budget request 
and $97,958,000 above the fiscal year 2004 level. Changes to 
the budget request include an increase of $15,000,000 in the 
hospital and health clinic programs for the Indian health care 
improvement fund and an increase of $498,000 in direct 
operations for Federal staffing and support costs at 
Headquarters. The Indian health care improvement fund money 
should be distributed in the same manner as in fiscal year 
2003, which was the last year in which funds were appropriated 
for this program. The increase for Headquarters staffing is 
critically needed because the IHS Headquarters capability to 
perform its many critical oversight and outreach functions has 
been hampered by staffing decreases over the past several 
years.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Service should reprogram the increases included in 
the budget to cover partially pay cost increases so that there 
is an equitable distribution across all Federal and tribal 
programs.
    2. Funds for the pharmacy residency program remain in the 
base for fiscal year 2005.
    3. The fiscal year 2001 direction on the use of loan 
repayment program funding should continue to be followed in 
fiscal year 2005.
    4. The Joslin diabetes program should be considered for 
funding using the special diabetes program funding in addition 
to the base funding of $1,500,000 for fiscal year 2005.

                        INDIAN HEALTH FACILITIES

    The need for new Indian health care facilities has not been 
fully quantified but it is safe to say that many billions of 
dollars would be required to renovate existing facilities and 
construct all the needed new hospitals and clinics. Safe and 
sanitary water and sewer systems for existing homes and solid 
waste disposal needs currently are estimated to amount to over 
$859 million for those projects that are considered to be 
economically feasible.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $391,351,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       354,448,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       405,048,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       +13,697,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       +50,600,000


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


    The Committee recommends $405,048,000 for Indian health 
facilities, an increase of $13,697,000 above the fiscal year 
2004 level and $50,600,000 above the budget request. Changes to 
the budget request include a decrease of $10,000,000 for 
sanitation facilities and increases of $2,000,000 for 
maintenance and improvement, $1,000,000 for equipment, and 
$57,600,000 for hospital and clinic construction.
    The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
hospital and clinic construction funds:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Committee
                           Project                               2005 request    recommendation     Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA Regional Youth Treatment Centers..........................                0       $2,700,000      +$2,700,000
Clinton, OK clinic...........................................                0       19,300,000      +19,300,000
Eagle Butte, SD clinic.......................................                0       18,300,000      +18,300,000
Joint Ventures (using existing list).........................                0        4,800,000       +4,800,000
Mobile dental units..........................................                0        1,500,000       +1,500,000
New health clinic planning and design........................                0        1,000,000       +1,000,000
Phoenix Indian Medical Center, AZ............................                0        4,000,000       +4,000,000
Red Mesa, AZ health center...................................      $19,382,000       19,382,000  ...............
Sisseton, SD health center...................................       17,300,000       17,300,000  ...............
Small ambulatory facilities..................................                0        6,000,000       +6,000,000
Wagner, SD staff quarters....................................        2,538,000        2,538,000  ...............
Zuni, NM staff quarters......................................        2,525,000        2,525,000  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................       41,745,000       99,345,000      +57,600,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee recommends bill language permitting the use 
of up to $2,700,000 for the purchase of land for the northern 
and southern California youth regional treatment centers 
subject to advance approval by the House and Senate Committees 
on Appropriations.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The maintenance program funding increase needs to remain 
in the base budget for fiscal year 2006 and beyond. Further 
increases will be necessary as existing facilities get older 
and as more hospitals and clinics are built and expanded.
    2. Funds for the Clinton, OK clinic will complete that 
project. Funds for the Eagle Butte, SD clinic will fund phase I 
of the construction effort. Funds for the California Regional 
Youth Treatment Centers are for planning and design of 2 
centers. Funds for the Phoenix Indian Medical Center, AZ are 
for the design of a southwest clinic and a southeast clinic.
    3. The funds for new health clinic planning and design are 
for facilities with newly approved program justification 
documents (PJDs). The Committee understands that there are two 
locations that potentially will have completed and approved 
PJDs within the next couple of months--San Carlos, Apache, AZ 
and Kayenta, AZ. The Committee urges the Service and the tribes 
to work together to complete these PJDs prior to conference 
consideration of this bill.
    4. The joint venture funding is for up to 2 projects using 
the existing list of qualified projects from the last 
solicitation.
    5. The Service should issue a new solicitation for small 
ambulatory care facilities. There should be a cap of $2,000,000 
for any one project and most, if not all, projects should be 
funded substantially below that level.
    6. The increase for equipment should be focused on 
replacing outdated analog medical devices with digital medical 
devices and telemedicine equipment and should remain in the 
base budget. Further increases will be necessary as existing 
equipment becomes outdated and as more hospitals and clinics 
are built and expanded.
    7. The Service should continue to work on needed 
improvements to the facilities priority system so that the full 
range of need for facilities in Indian country is given 
appropriate consideration.
    8. The methodology used to distribute facilities funding 
should address the fluctuating annual workload and maintain 
parity among IHS areas and tribes as the workload shifts.
    9. Funds for sanitation facilities for new and renovated 
housing should be used to serve housing provided by the Bureau 
of Indian Affairs Housing Improvement Program, new homes, and 
homes renovated to like-new condition. Onsite sanitation 
facilities may also be provided for homes occupied by the 
disabled or sick who have physician referrals indicating an 
immediate medical need for adequate sanitation facilities at 
home.
    10. Sanitation funds should not be used to provide 
sanitation facilities for new homes funded by the housing 
programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 
The HUD should provide any needed funds to the IHS for that 
purpose.
    11. The IHS may use up to $5,000,000 in sanitation funding 
for projects to clean up and replace open dumps on Indian lands 
pursuant to the Indian Lands Open Dump Cleanup Act of 1994.

            Administrative Provisions, Indian Health Service

    The Committee recommends bill language permitting the use 
of third party collections for the purchase of land for the IHS 
hospital in Tahlequah, Oklahoma subject to advance approval by 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. The land 
will be used for a parking lot expansion at the W.W. Hastings 
hospital.

                         OTHER RELATED AGENCIES


              Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    The dispute between the Hopi and Navajo tribes is 
centuries-old. The Hopi trace their origin on the land back to 
the Anasazi race whose presence is recorded back to 1150 A.D. 
Later in the 16th century Navajo settlement led to the 
isolation of the Hopi Reservation as an island within the area 
occupied by the Navajo reservation. In 1882, President Arthur 
issued an Executive Order, which granted the Hopi a 2.5 million 
acre reservation to be occupied by the Hopi and such other 
Indians as the Secretary of the Interior saw fit to resettle 
there. Intertribal problems arose between the Navajo tribe and 
the Hopi tribe revolving around the question of the ownership 
of the land as well as cultural differences between the two 
tribes. Efforts to resolve these conflicts were not successful 
and led Congress to pass legislation in 1958, which authorized 
a lawsuit to determine ownership of the land. When attempts at 
mediation of the dispute as specified in an Act passed in 1974 
failed, the district court in Arizona partitioned the Joint Use 
Area equally between the Navajo and Hopi tribes under a decree 
that has required the relocation of members of both tribes. 
Most of those to be relocated are Navajo living on the Hopi 
Partitioned Land.
    At this time, there are approximately 146 households that 
remain to be relocated, of which 13 are full-time residents on 
the Hopi Partitioned Land. A total of 3,370 families have been 
relocated from the Hopi Partitioned Land.




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $13,366,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        11,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        11,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        -2,366,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $11,000,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation, 
the same as the budget request and $2,366,000 below the 2004 
enacted level.

    Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts 
                              Development


                        PAYMENT TO THE INSTITUTE




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $6,173,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         6,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         6,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          -173,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $6,000,000 for the Institute of 
American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development, 
the same as the budget request and $173,000 below the 2004 
enacted level.

                        Smithsonian Institution

    The Smithsonian Institution is unique in the Federal 
establishment. Established by the Congress in 1846 to carry out 
the trust included in James Smithson's will, it has been 
engaged for over 150 years in the ``increase and diffusion of 
knowledge among men'' in accordance with the donor's 
instructions. For some years, it used only the funds made 
available by the trust. Then, before the turn of the century, 
it began to receive Federal appropriations to conduct some of 
its activities. With the expenditure of both private and 
Federal funds over the years, it has grown into one of the 
world's great scientific, cultural, and intellectual 
organizations. It operates magnificent museums, outstanding art 
galleries, and important research centers. Its collections are 
among the best in the world. Its traveling exhibits bring 
beauty and information throughout the country.
    The Smithsonian attracted approximately 25,000,000 visitors 
in 2003 to its museums, galleries, and zoological park. 
Additional millions also view Smithsonian traveling 
exhibitions, which appear across the United States and abroad. 
Another major attraction is the annual Folklife Festival, which 
is held on the Mall in Washington, DC. As custodian of the 
National Collections, the Smithsonian is responsible for more 
than 140 million art objects, natural history specimens, and 
artifacts. These collections are displayed for the enjoyment 
and education of visitors and are available for research by the 
staff of the Institution and by hundreds of visiting students, 
scientists, and historians each year. Other significant study 
efforts draw their data and results directly from terrestrial, 
marine, and astrophysical observations at various Smithsonian 
installations.
    The Smithsonian complex presently consists of 17 museums 
and galleries in New York City and the Washington, DC 
metropolitan area, including a zoological park; a number of 
research centers including an animal conservation and research 
center in Front Royal, Virginia; a natural preserve in Panama 
and one on the Chesapeake Bay; an oceanographic research 
facility in Fort Pierce, Florida; astrophysical stations in 
Cambridge, Massachusetts and Mt. Hopkins, Arizona and 
elsewhere; and supporting administrative, laboratory, and 
storage areas.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $488,653,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       499,125,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       496,925,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +8,272,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -2,200,000


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


    The Committee recommends $496,925,000 for salaries and 
expenses, a decrease of $2,200,000 below the budget request and 
an increase of $8,272,000 above the enacted level. Increases to 
the request include $1,000,000 for major scientific 
instrumentation, and $500,000 to continue the Tropical Research 
Institute's work in microorganisms in tropical soil. If the 
Smithsonian wishes to continue this program in fiscal year 
2006, it should be included in the budget request. Decreases to 
the request include $1,000,0000 for the new National Museum of 
African American History and Culture, $1,000,000 for facilities 
operations, security, and support, and $1,700,000 for digital 
infrastructure.

                           FACILITIES CAPITAL




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $107,626,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       128,900,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       122,900,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................       +15,274,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -6,000,000


    The Committee recommends $122,900,000 for facilities 
capital, an increase of $15,274,000 above the enacted level and 
a reduction of $6,000,000 below the budget request. Decreases 
to the request include $1,000,000 for Pod 5 due to budgetary 
constraints and $5,000,000 for site preparation for the Asia II 
exhibit. Funds for the Asia II exhibit are not necessary at 
this time due to the additional $15,000,000 above the request 
provided by the Committee in fiscal year 2004. When the zoo 
requires additional funds, the Committee will consider future 
requests.

           ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS, SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

    There is new bill language included under Administrative 
Provisions which prohibits the Smithsonian from using funds to 
purchase any additional buildings without prior consultation 
with the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.

                        National Gallery of Art

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

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $86,768,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        93,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        93,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +6,232,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $93,000,000, the budget request, 
for salaries and expenses of the National Gallery of Art, an 
increase of $6,232,000 above the fiscal year 2004 level.

            REPAIR, RESTORATION AND RENOVATION OF BUILDINGS




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $11,457,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        11,100,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        11,100,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          -357,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $11,100,000, the budget request, 
for repair, restoration and renovation of buildings at the 
National Gallery of Art, a decrease of $357,000 below the 
fiscal year 2004 level.

             John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts

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

                       OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $16,356,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        17,152,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        17,152,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +796,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $17,152,000 for operations and 
maintenance, the same as the budget request and $796,000 above 
the enacted level.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $15,803,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        16,334,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        10,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        -5,803,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -6,334,000


    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for construction, a 
decrease of $5,803,000 below the enacted level and $6,334,000 
below the budget request.

            Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $8,498,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         8,987,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         8,987,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +489,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $8,987,000 for salaries and 
expenses, the same as the budget request and $489,000 above the 
2004 enacted level.

           National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities


                    National Endowment for the Arts


                       GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $120,972,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       139,400,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       120,972,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -18,428,000


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


    The Committee recommends $120,972,000 for the National 
Endowment for the Arts, a reduction of $18,428,000 from the 
budget request and the same as the 2004 enacted level. Although 
the Committee sees some merit in the proposed new national 
initiative on American masterpieces, there are insufficient 
resources to expand arts grants.
    Bill language is included, under Title III--General 
Provisions, retaining provisions in last year's bill regarding 
restrictions on individual grants, subgranting, and seasonal 
support (Sec. 309); and authority to solicit and invest funds 
(Sec. 310); priority for rural and underserved communities, 
priority for grants that encourage public knowledge, education, 
understanding, and appreciation of the arts, designation of a 
category for grants of national significance, and a 15-percent 
cap on the total amount of grant funds directed to any one 
State (Sec. 311).

                 National Endowment for the Humanities

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

                       GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................      $119,386,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................       145,878,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................       122,377,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +2,991,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................       -23,501,000


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


    The Committee recommends $122,377,000 for grants and 
administration, an increase of $2,991,000 above the 2004 level 
and $23,501,000 below the budget request. The Committee has not 
included the $23,124,000 increase requested for the ``We the 
People'' American history initiative begun with a $9,876,000 
appropriation in fiscal year 2004. The Committee sees merit to 
this new initiative but has inadequate resources to expand it 
this year. The Committee recommendation includes other 
requested increases under this heading, which partially offset 
increases to fixed costs.

                            MATCHING GRANTS




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $15,924,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        16,122,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        16,122,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +198,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $16,122,000 for matching grants as 
requested, an increase of $198,000 above the fiscal year 2004 
level.

                        Commission of Fine Arts

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

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $1,405,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         1,793,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         1,793,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +388,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $1,793,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Commission of Fine Arts, as requested, an 
increase of $388,000 over the enacted funding level and the 
same as the budget request.

               NATIONAL CAPITAL ARTS AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $6,914,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         5,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         7,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................           +86,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        +2,000,000


    The National Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs program was 
established in Public Law 99-190 to support artistic and 
cultural programs in the Nation's Capital. The Committee 
recommends $7,000,000, an increase of $86,000 above the 2004 
level and $2,000,000 above the budget request. The Committee 
rejects the Administration's proposal to limit grants to 
$400,000 in a single year.

               Advisory Council on Historic Preservation


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $3,951,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         4,600,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         4,600,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +649,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $4,600,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, as 
requested, an increase of $649,000 above the 2004 level.

                  National Capital Planning Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................        $7,635,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................         8,155,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         7,999,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          +364,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................          -156,000


    The Committee recommends $7,999,000, for salaries and 
expenses of the National Capital Planning Commission, a 
decrease of $156,000 below the budget request and an increase 
of $364,000 above the enacted level. The Committee has included 
bill language allowing the use of up to one-quarter of one 
percent of funding for official representational activities to 
be used only when hosting international visitors associated 
with the international capitals working group.

                United States Holocaust Memorial Museum


                       HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM

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




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $39,505,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        41,433,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        41,433,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................        +1,928,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $41,433,000 for the Holocaust 
Memorial Museum, the same as the budget request and $1,928,000 
above the enacted level.

                             Presidio Trust


                          PRESIDIO TRUST FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2004...........................       $20,445,000
Budget estimate, 2005.................................        20,000,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................        20,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2004...............................          -445,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the Presidio Trust 
fund, the same as the budget request and $445,000 below the 
enacted level.

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Section 301 continues a provision providing for public 
availability of information on consulting services contracts.
    Section 302 continues a provision prohibiting activities to 
promote public support or opposition to legislative proposals.
    Section 303 continues a provision providing for annual 
appropriations unless expressly provided otherwise in this Act.
    Section 304 continues a provision limiting the use of 
personal cooks, chauffeurs or servants.
    Section 305 provides for restrictions on departmental 
assessments unless approved by the Committees on 
Appropriations.
    Section 306 continues a provision limiting the sale of 
giant sequoia.
    Section 307 continues a limitation on accepting and 
processing applications for patents and on the patenting of 
Federal lands; permits processing of grandfathered 
applications; and permits third-party contractors to process 
grandfathered applications.
    Section 308 continues a provision limiting payments for 
contract support costs in past years to the funds available in 
law and accompanying report language in those years for the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service.
    Section 309 continues a provision specifying reforms and 
limitations dealing with the National Endowment for the Arts.
    Section 310 continues a provision permitting the collection 
and use of private funds by the National Endowment for the Arts 
and the National Endowment for the Humanities.
    Section 311 continues direction to the National Endowment 
for the Arts on funding distribution.
    Section 312 continues a limitation on completing and 
issuing the five-year program under the Forest and Rangeland 
Renewable Resources Planning Act.
    Section 313 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
funds to support government-wide administrative functions 
unless they are justified in the budget process and approved by 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
    Section 314 permits the Secretaries of Agriculture and the 
Interior to limit competition for watershed restoration project 
contracts under the ``Jobs in the Woods'' program.
    Section 315 continues a provision which permits the Forest 
Service to use the roads and trails fund for backlog 
maintenance and priority forest health treatments.
    Section 316 continues a provision limiting the use of 
answering machines during core business hours except in case of 
emergency and requires an option of talking to a person. The 
American taxpayer deserves to receive personal attention from 
public servants.
    Section 317 amends the Knutson-Vandenburg act to clarify 
that the Forest Service shall not return Knutson-Vandenburg 
funds designated as excess to the Treasury, as long as there 
may be a need to use such funds for wildfire suppression and if 
the amount designated as excess is less than the total amount 
of unreimbursed funds previously transferred from this account 
for wildfire suppression. Should the amount of excess funds 
exceed the unreimbursed amount, the excess portion may be 
transferred to the Treasury unless there is no anticipated need 
to use the funding for wildfire suppression. This section also 
updates the Act concerning the gender of the Secretary and 
clarifies that all KV funded project categories are of equal 
priority.
    Section 318 continues a provision prohibiting the Forest 
Service from using projects under the recreation fee 
demonstration program to supplant existing concessions.
    Section 319 continues a provision clarifying the Forest 
Service land management planning revision requirements.
    Section 320 continues a provision limiting preleasing, 
leasing, and related activities within the boundaries of 
National monuments.
    Section 321 extends the Forest Service Conveyances Pilot 
Program.
    Section 322 makes permanent a provision providing authority 
for the staff of Congressionally established foundations to use 
GSA contract airfare rates and Federal government hotel 
accommodation rates when on official business.
    Section 323 continues a provision providing the Secretary 
of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture the authority 
to enter into reciprocal agreements with foreign nations 
concerning the personal liability of firefighters.
    Section 324 continues a provision authorizing a 
demonstration program for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, which 
permits the Eagle Butte service unit to pay higher salaries and 
bonuses to attract health professionals, if they can do so at 
no additional cost. The tribe has reported that part-time 
contract employees currently are costing more than it would 
cost the tribe to hire full-time permanent employees under this 
demonstration program.
    Section 325 continues a provision prohibiting the transfer 
of funds to other agencies other than provided in this Act.
    Section 326 continues a legislative provision limiting 
funds for oil or gas leasing or permitting on the Finger Lakes 
National Forest, NY.
    Section 327 continues a provision limiting the use of funds 
for the planning, design, or construction of improvements to 
Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House.
    Section 328 continues a provision which authorizes the 
Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to 
give consideration to rural communities, local and non-profit 
groups, and disadvantaged workers in entering into contracts 
for hazardous fuels and watershed projects.
    Section 329 continues a provision which limits the use of 
funds for filing declarations of takings or condemnations. This 
provision does not apply to the Everglades National Park 
Protection and Environmental Act.
    Section 330 restricts the Forest Service use of the 
Recreation Fee Demonstration program to certain developed 
sites.
    Section 331 provides guidance on competitive sourcing 
activities and clarifies annual reporting requirements to 
specify the reporting of the full costs associated with 
sourcing studies and related activities. Language is also 
included concerning the Forest Service so the previous, faulty 
competitive sourcing studies are not repeated in the future.
    Section 332 requires overhead charges, deductions, reserves 
or holdbacks to be presented in annual budget justifications, 
with changes presented to the Appropriations Committees for 
approval.
    Section 333 prohibits the expenditure of funds on Safecom, 
Disaster Management, E-Training, and E-Rulemaking.
    Section 334 authorizes the conveyance of land within the 
San Bernardino National Forest, CA.
    Section 335 extends a previous provision for four more 
years which encourages cooperative hazardous fuels projects 
with the State of Colorado and the Forest Service, and extends 
this authority to the Bureau of Land Management.

 TITLE IV--SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2004 AND 2005 
            FOR URGENT WILDLAND FIRE SUPPRESSION ACTIVITIES


 Chapter I--Supplemental Wildland Fire Suppression Funding for Fiscal 
                               Year 2004

    The Committee has included supplemental appropriations for 
the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service that 
provide an additional $500,000,000 in wildland fire suppression 
funds pursuant to Section 312 of the Concurrent Budget 
Resolution for fiscal year 2005. This includes $100,000,000 for 
the Department of the Interior and $400,000,000 for the Forest 
Service. The supplemental funding provided in this Title will 
become available if the wildland fire suppression program is 
funded at the 10-year average; there are insufficient funds in 
the suppression program for the current fiscal year; and the 
current fire season is of sufficient severity to require the 
funds.
    Severe drought conditions in many regions of the country, 
the expansion of the wildland urban interface, and the 
condition of the nation's forests are likely to cause severe 
wildfire conditions in fiscal year 2004. This funding is 
intended to preclude borrowing additional amounts from ongoing 
agency programs. Past borrowing of funds from ongoing projects 
for wildland fire suppression caused project cancellations, 
strained relationships with partners, and disruptions in 
management.

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


                       Bureau of Land Management


                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends an additional amount of 
$100,000,000 for ``Wildland Fire Management'', in fiscal year 
2004, as needed, and as described above.

                       DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


                             Forest Service


                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends an additional amount of 
$400,000,000 for ``Wildland Fire Management'', in fiscal year 
2004, as needed, and as described above.

 Chapter II--Supplemental Wildland Fire Suppression Funding for Fiscal 
                               Year 2005

    The Committee has included supplemental appropriations for 
the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service to 
provide an additional $500,000,000 in wildland fire suppression 
funds pursuant to Section 312 of the Concurrent Budget 
Resolution for fiscal year 2005. This includes $100,000,000 for 
the Department of the Interior and $400,000,000 for the Forest 
Service. Bill language is included that provides the additional 
funds only if funds provided in Titles I and II of this Act for 
wildland fire suppression are insufficient.
    The Committee anticipates severe drought conditions in many 
regions of the country as well as increased expansions of the 
wildland urban interface and the deterioration of the nation's 
forests. These conditions are likely to cause severe wildfire 
conditions in fiscal year 2005. This funding, available only if 
needed, is intended to preclude borrowing additional amounts 
from ongoing agency programs. Past borrowing of funds from 
ongoing projects for wildland fire suppression caused project 
cancellations, strained relationships with partners, and 
disruptions in management.

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


                       Bureau of Land Management


                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends an additional amount of 
$100,000,000 for ``Wildland Fire Management'', in fiscal year 
2005, as needed, and as described above.

                       DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


                             Forest Service


                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommends an additional amount of 
$400,000,000 for ``Wildland Fire Management'', in fiscal year 
2005, as needed, and as described above.

                              Rescissions

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

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

                           Transfers of Funds

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

                                 APPROPRIATION TRANSFERS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Account to which transfer is to be
    Account from which transfer is to be made        Amount                    made                    Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of the Interior, Departmental           $13,500,000  Bureau of Land Management, Central   $13,500,000
 Management.                                                     Hazardous Materials Fund.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Changes in Application of Existing Law

    Pursuant to clause 3, rule XIII of the Rules of the House 
of Representatives, the following Statements are submitted 
describing the effect of provisions in the accompanying bill, 
which directly or indirectly change the application of existing 
law. In most instances these provisions have been included in 
prior appropriations Acts.
    The bill provides that certain appropriations items remain 
available until expended or extends the availability of funds 
beyond the fiscal year where programs or projects are 
continuing in nature under the provisions of authorizing 
legislation but for which that legislation does not 
specifically authorize such extended availability. This 
authority tends to result in savings by preventing the practice 
of committing funds at the end of the fiscal year.
    The bill includes, in certain instances, limitations on the 
obligation of funds for particular functions or programs. These 
limitations include restrictions on the obligation of funds for 
administrative expenses, travel expenses, the use of 
consultants, and programmatic areas within the overall 
jurisdiction of a particular agency.
    The Committee has included limitations for official 
entertainment or reception and representation expenses for 
selected agencies in the bill.
    Language is included in the various parts of the bill to 
continue ongoing activities of those Federal agencies, which 
require annual authorization or additional legislation which to 
date, has not been enacted.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Management of lands and resources, permitting the use of 
receipts from the Land and Water Conservation Act of 1965; 
providing funds to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation 
under certain conditions; permitting the use of fees from 
communication site rentals; limiting the use of funds for 
destroying wild horses and burros; and permitting the 
collection of fees for processing mining applications and for 
certain public land uses; permitting the use of these fees for 
program operations, and providing for a Youth Conservation 
Corp.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Wildland fire management, permitting the use of funds from 
other accounts for firefighting; permitting the use of funds 
for lodging and subsistence of firefighters; permitting the 
acceptance and use of funds for firefighting; permitting the 
use of grants, contracts and cooperative agreements for 
hazardous fuels reduction, including cost-sharing and local 
assistance; permitting reimbursement to the Fish and Wildlife 
Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service for 
consultation activities under the Endangered Species Act; 
permits the use of firefighting funds for the leasing of 
properties or the construction of facilities; providing for the 
transfer of funds between the Department of the Interior and 
the Department of Agriculture; and providing funds for support 
of Federal emergency response actions.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Central hazardous materials fund, providing that sums received 
from a party for remedial actions shall be credited to the 
account, and defining non-monetary payments.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Oregon and California grant lands, authorizing the transfer of 
receipts to the Treasury.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Forest ecosystems health and recovery fund, permitting the use 
of salvage timber receipts.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Service charges, deposits, and forfeitures, allowing the use of 
funds on any damaged public lands.
    Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 
Administrative provisions, permitting the payment of rewards 
for information on violations of law on Bureau lands; and 
providing for cost-sharing arrangements for printing services.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Resource management, allowing for the maintenance of 
the herd of long-horned cattle on the Wichita Mountains 
Wildlife Refuge. Without this language, the long-horned cattle 
would have to be removed from the refuge. Language also is 
included providing for the Natural Communities Conservation 
Planning program and for a Youth Conservation Corps; limiting 
funding for certain Endangered Species Act listing programs; 
permitting payment for information or rewards in the law 
enforcement program; and earmarking funds for contaminant 
analysis.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Land acquisition, prohibiting the use of project funds 
for overhead expenses.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Landowner incentive program, providing matching grants 
to States and territories.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Private Stewardship grants, providing for grants for 
private conservation efforts.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, State and tribal wildlife grants, specifying the 
distribution formula and planning and cost-sharing 
requirements, requiring that funds unobligated after two years 
be reapportioned, and limiting administrative costs.
    Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Administrative provisions, providing for repair of 
damage to public roads; providing options for the purchase of 
land not to exceed $1; providing for installation of certain 
recreation facilities; and permitting the maintenance and 
improvement of aquaria and other facilities, cost-shared 
arrangements for printing services, permitting the use of funds 
for employment related legal services, the acceptance of 
donated aircraft, and limiting the use of funds for 
establishing new refuges.
    Language is included under National Park Service, Operation 
of the National park system, allowing road maintenance service 
to trucking permittees on a reimbursable basis. This provision 
has been included in annual appropriations Acts since 1954. 
Language also is included providing for a Youth Conservation 
Corps program, and permitting reimbursement to the Park Police 
for special events under limited circumstances.
    Language is included under National Park Service, National 
recreation and preservation, prohibiting the use of cooperative 
agreements and any form of cash grant for the rivers, trail, 
and conservation assistance program, and providing funds for 
the city of Tacoma, WA.
    Language is included under National Park Service, Historic 
preservation fund, providing grants for Save America's 
Treasures to be matched by non-Federal funds; individual 
projects are only eligiblefor one grant and are subject to 
prior approval; and funds for Federal projects are available by 
transfer to individual agencies.
    Language is included under National Park Service, 
construction, limiting funds for Park Service Partnership 
projects with certain exceptions, limiting donation or services 
associated with new facilities, limiting funds for certain 
facilities at the Washington Monument, providing funds for 
Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park with 
certain restriction, and limiting funds for Dayton Aviation 
Heritage National Historical Park.
    Language is included under National Park Service, Land and 
water conservation fund, rescinding $30,000,000 in contract 
authority.
    Language is included under National Park Service, Land 
acquisition and State assistance, and limiting the use of funds 
to establish a contingency fund for State grants.
    Language is included under National Park Service, 
Administrative provisions, limiting funds for grants and 
contracts that don't include the text of 18 U.S.C. 1913, 
preventing the implementation of an agreement for the 
redevelopment of the southern end of Ellis Island; allowing 
funds to be used to maintain certain parts of the District of 
Columbia near the White House; limiting the use of funds for 
the United Nation's Biodiversity Convention; permitting the use 
of funds for workplace safety needs; authorizing reimbursable 
agreements in advance of receipt of funds; allowing the 
Secretary of Interior to appeal value determinations; and 
allowing certain franchise fees to be available for expenditure 
without further appropriation to extinguish or reduce liability 
for certain possessory interests.
    Language is included under U.S. Geological Survey, Surveys, 
investigations and research, providing for two-year 
availability of funds for biological research and for the 
operations of cooperative research units; prohibiting the 
conduct of new surveys on private property without permission; 
and requiring cost sharing for cooperative topographic mapping 
and water resource data collection activities.
    Language is included under U.S. Geological Survey, 
Administrative provisions, permitting reimbursement of funds to 
the GSA for security services, permitting contracting for 
certain mapping and surveys; permitting construction of 
facilities; permitting acquisition of land for certain uses; 
allowing payment of expenses for the National Committee on 
Geology; permitting payments to interstate compact negotiators; 
permitting the use of certain contracts, grants, and 
cooperative agreements; and recognizing students and recent 
graduates as Federal employees for the purposes of travel and 
work injury compensation.
    Language is included under Minerals Management Service, 
Royalty and offshore minerals management, permitting the use of 
excess receipts from Outer Continental Shelf leasing 
activities; providing for reasonable expenses related to 
volunteer beach and marine clean-up activities; providing for 
refunds for overpayments on Indian allottee leases; providing 
for collecting royalties and late payment interest on amounts 
received in settlements associated with Federal and Indian 
leases; permitting the use of revenues from a royalty-in-kind 
program; and providing that royalty-in-kind be equal to, or 
greater than, royalty-in-value.
    Language is included under Office of Surface Mining 
Reclamation and Enforcement, Regulation and technology, 
permitting the use of moneys collected pursuant to assessment 
of civil penalties to reclaim lands affected by coal mining 
after August 3, 1977 and permitting payment to State and tribal 
personnel for travel and per diem expenses for training.
    Language is included under Office of Surface Mining 
Reclamation and Enforcement, Abandoned mine reclamation fund, 
earmarking funds for acid mine drainage; limiting grants to 
minimum program States; allowing the use of debt recovery to 
pay for debt collection; providing certain grant flexibility to 
the State of Maryland; and allowing funds to be used for travel 
expenses while attending training.
    Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
Operation of Indian programs, limiting funds for contract 
support costs and for administrative cost grants for schools; 
permitting the use of tribal priority allocations for general 
assistance payments to individuals, for contract support costs, 
and for repair and replacement of schools; providing for an 
Indian self-determination fund; and allowing the transfer of 
certain forestry funds.
    Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
Construction, providing that six percent of Federal Highway 
Trust Fund contract authority may be used for management costs; 
providing Safety of Dams funds on a non-reimbursable basis; 
providing for the transfer of Navajo irrigation project funds 
to the Bureau of Reclamation; requiring the use of 
administrative and cost accounting principles for certain 
school construction projects and exempting such projects from 
certain requirements; requiring conformance with building codes 
and health and safety standards; specifying the procedure for 
dispute resolution; and providing funds for the Eastern Band of 
Cherokee education facility at the Ravensford tract.
    Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian 
Land and Water Claims Settlements and Miscellaneous Payments to 
Indians, permiting funding for the Quinault Indian Nation 
boundary settlement.
    Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian 
Guaranteed Loan Program account, limiting funds for loans under 
certain circumstances, and providing administrative expenses.
    Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
Administrative provisions, allowing contracting for the San 
Carlos Irrigation Project; limiting the use of funds for 
contracts, grants and cooperative agreements; allowing tribes 
to return appropriated funds for distribution to other tribes; 
prohibiting funding of Alaska schools; and limiting the number 
of schools and the expansion of grade levels in individual 
schools.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, Insular 
Affairs, Assistance to Territories, requiring audits of the 
financial transactions of the Territorial governments by the 
General Accounting Office; providing grant funding under 
certain terms of the Agreement of the Special Representatives 
on Future United States Financial Assistance for the Northern 
Mariana Islands; allowing grants for the Pacific Basin 
Development Council; providing a grant to the Close-Up 
foundation; providing for capital infrastructure in various 
Territories; and allowing appropriations for disaster 
assistance to be used as non-Federal matching funds for hazard 
mitigation grants.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, 
Departmental management, salaries and expenses, permitting 
payments to former Bureau of Mines workers; directing transfer 
of unobligated balances in the Central Hazardous Material Fund; 
limiting the establishment of additional reserves in the 
working capital fund.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, Payments 
in lieu of taxes, to exclude any payment that is less than 
$100.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, Office of 
special trustee for American Indians, limiting the amount of 
funding available for historical accounting, specifying that 
the statute of limitations shall not commence on any claim 
resulting from trust funds losses; exempting quarterly 
statements for accounts less than $1; requiring annual 
statements and records maintenance; limiting use of funds to 
correct administrative errors; and permitting the use of 
recoveries from erroneous payments.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, Indian 
land consolidation, permitting transfers of funds for 
administration.
    Language is included under Departmental Offices, 
Administrative provisions, allowing the sale of existing 
aircraft with proceeds used to offset the purchase price of 
replacement aircraft; prohibiting the use of working capital or 
consolidated working funds to augment certain offices and 
allowing the acquisition of aircraft through various means; 
requiring description of working capital fund charges in annual 
budget justifications; and requiring reports on National 
Business Center activities.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, allowing transfer of funds in certain 
emergency situations and requiring replacement with a 
supplemental appropriation request and designating certain 
transferred funds as ``emergency requirements'' under the 
Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, permitting the Department to consolidate 
services and receive reimbursement for said services. Language 
also is included providing for uniform allowances.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, allowing obligations in connection with 
contracts issued for services or rentals for periods not in 
excess of 12 months beginning at any time during the fiscal 
year.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, restricting various oil and gas preleasing, 
leasing, exploration and drilling activities within the Outer 
Continental Shelf in the Georges Bank-North Atlantic planning 
area, Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic planning area, Eastern 
Gulf of Mexico planning area, North Aleutian Basin planning 
area, Northern, Southern and Central California planning areas, 
and Washington/Oregon planning area.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, prohibiting fee exemptions for non-local 
traffic through National Parks, and limiting the investment of 
Federal funds by Indian tribes.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, permitting the transfer of funds between the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee for 
American Indians; providing for administrative law judges to 
handle Indian issues; permitting the redistribution of certain 
Indian funds with limitations; directing allocation of funds 
for Bureau of Indian Affairs funded post-secondary schools; 
limiting the use of the Huron Cemetery to religious and 
cultural activities; permitting the conveyance of the Twin 
Cities Research Center; authorizing a cooperative agreement 
with the Golden Gate National Parks Association; permitting the 
Bureau of Land Management to retain funds from the sale of 
seeds and seedlings; allowing the use of helicopters and motor 
vehicles on Sheldon and Hart National Wildlife refuge; 
authorizing funding transfers for Shenandoah Valley Battlefield 
NHD and Ice Age NST; and prohibiting the closure of the 
underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns NP.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, prohibiting demolition of the bridge between 
New Jersey and Ellis Island; prohibiting posting of clothing 
optional signs at Canaveral NS; limiting compensation for the 
Special Master and Court Monitor for the Cobell v. Norton 
litigation; allowing payment of attorney fees for Federal 
employees related to the Cobell v. Norton litigation; requiring 
the Fish and Wildlife Service to mark hatchery salmon; and 
allowing for the transfer of certain Departmental Management 
funds to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for Midway Island 
Refuge airport; addressing the use of certain Indian lands for 
gaming purposes; and preventing funds to study or reduce the 
water level at Lake Powell.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, limiting funds for the National Indian Gaming 
Commission; providing for expansion of a tribal school 
demonstration program.
    Language is included under General Provisions, Department 
of the Interior, limiting the use of funds for certain special 
events on the National Mall.
    Language is included under Forest Service, State and 
private forestry, deriving Forest Legacy funding from the Land 
and Water Conservation Fund; and requiring House and Senate 
Appropriations Committee notification before releasing forest 
legacy project funds.
    Language is included under Forest Service, National forest 
system, allowing 50 percent of the fees collected under the 
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act to remain available until 
expended; requiring the fiscal year 2006 budget justification 
to display unobligated balances available at the start of 
fiscal year 2005; and permitting the transfer of funds to the 
Bureau of Land Management for wild horse and burro management 
and for cadastral surveys.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Wildland fire 
management, allowing the use of funds to repay advances from 
other accounts; allowing reimbursement of States for certain 
emergency activities; requiring 50 percent of any unobligated 
balances remaining at the end of fiscal year 2004, excepting 
hazardous fuels funding, to be transferred to the Knutson-
Vandenberg Fund as repayment for past advances; permitting the 
use of funds for the Joint Fire Science program; providing for 
grants and cooperative agreements with local communities; 
providing for use of funds on adjacent, non-Federal lands for 
hazard reduction; providing funding for implementing the 
Community Forest Restoration Act; providing contract authority 
for fuel reduction projects; and providing for the transfer of 
funds between the Department of Interior and the Department of 
Agriculture.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Capital 
improvement and maintenance, allowing funds to be used for road 
decommissioning and requiring that no road decommissioning be 
funded until notice and an opportunity for public comment has 
been provided.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Range betterment 
fund, providing that six percent of the funds may be used for 
administrative expenses.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative 
provisions, providing that proceeds from the sale of aircraft 
may be used to purchase replacement aircraft; allowing funds 
for certain employment contracts; allowing funds to be used for 
purchase and alteration of building; allowing for acquisition 
of certain lands and interests; allowing expenses for certain 
volunteer activities; providing for the cost of uniforms; 
providing for debt collections on certain contracts; permitting 
the transfer of funds for emergency firefighting from other 
Forest Service accounts under certain circumstances; providing 
that the first transfer of funds for emergency firefighting 
shall include land acquisition and Forest Legacy funds; and 
allowing funds to be used through the Agency for International 
Development and the Foreign Agricultural Service for work in 
foreign countries and to support other forestry activities 
outside of the United States.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative 
provisions, prohibiting the transfer of funds under the 
Department of Agriculture transfer authority; canceling 
$40,000,000 in funding from the fiscal year 2002 farm bill; 
prohibiting the use of funds to implement the Forest Land 
Enhancement program; prohibiting reprogramming without 
approval; and limiting funds to be transferred to the USDA 
Working Capital Fund.
    Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative 
provisions, providing for a Youth Conservation Corps program; 
providing for matching funds and administrative expenses for 
the National Forest Foundation and also matching funds for the 
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation; providing funds for 
sustainable rural development; providing payments to counties 
within the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area; 
permitting limited reimbursements to the Office of General 
Counsel in USDA; allowing the limited use of funds for law 
enforcement emergencies; allowing the transfer of funds to the 
Department of the Interior for endangered species consultation; 
and providing Federal employee status for certain individuals 
employed under the Older American Act of 1965.
    Language is included under Department of Energy, Clean coal 
technology, deferring certain funding for one year; and 
providing funding and limitations for the FutureGen program.
    Language is included under Department of Energy, Fossil 
energy research and development, permitting the use of funds 
from other program accounts for the National Energy Technology 
Laboratory; specifying certain conditions for the Clean Coal 
Power Initiative; and limiting the field testing of nuclear 
explosives for the recovery of oil and gas.
    Language is included under Department of Energy, Naval 
petroleum and oil shale reserves, permitting the use of 
unobligated balances.
    Language is included under the Department of Energy, Energy 
conservation, providing allocations of grants for 
weatherization and State energy conservation.
    Language is included under Administrative provisions, 
Department of Energy, providing for vehicle and guard services 
and uniform allowances; providing for the transfer of funds to 
other agencies of the Government; limiting programs of price 
supports and loan guarantees to what is provided in 
appropriations Acts; providing for retention of revenues by the 
Secretary of Energy on certain projects; requiring certain 
contracts be submitted to Congress prior to implementation; 
prohibiting issuance of procurement documents without 
appropriations; and permitting the use of contributions and 
fees for cooperative projects.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, Indian 
health services, providing that certain contracts and grants 
may be performed in two fiscal years; exempting certain tribal 
funding from fiscal year constraints; limiting funds for 
catastrophic care, loan repayment and certain contracts; 
capping contract support cost spending; providing for use of 
collections under Title IV of the Indian Health Care 
Improvement Act; and permitting the use of Indian Health Care 
Improvement Fund monies for facilities improvement.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, Indian 
health facilities, providing that funds may be used to purchase 
land, modular buildings and trailers; providing for certain 
purchases and for a demolition fund; providing authority for 
contracts for small ambulatory facilities; and providing for 
land purchases for IHS facilities in California subject to 
advance approval.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, 
Administrative provisions, providing for payments for telephone 
service in private residences in the field, purchase of motor 
vehicles, aircraft and reprints; providing for purchase and 
erection of portable buildings; providing funds for uniforms; 
and allowing deobligation and reobligation of funds applied to 
self-governance funding agreements.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, 
Administrative provisions, providing that health care may be 
extended to non-Indians at Indian Health Service facilities and 
funds are not available for assessments by the Department of 
Health and Human Services; providing a limitation on personnel 
ceilings at certain IHS facilities; providing that 
reimbursements for IHS training provide total costs; allowing 
purchase of certain lands in Oklahoma.
    Language is included under Indian Health Service, 
Administrative provisions, allowing payment of expenses for 
meeting attendance; specifying that certain funds shall not be 
subject to certain travel limitations; prohibiting the 
expenditure of funds to implement new eligibility regulations; 
providing that funds be apportioned only in the appropriation 
structure in this Act; and prohibiting changing the 
appropriations structure without approval of the Appropriations 
Committees.
    Language is included under Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian 
Relocation, Salaries and expenses, defining eligible 
relocatees; prohibiting movement of any single Navajo or Navajo 
family unless a new or replacement home is available; limiting 
relocatees to one new or replacement home; and establishing a 
priority for relocation of Navajos to those certified eligible 
who have selected and received homesites on the Navajo 
reservation or selected a replacement residence off the Navajo 
reservation.
    Language is included under Smithsonian Institution, 
Salaries and expenses, providing that funds may be used to 
support American overseas research centers; allowing for 
advance payments to independent contractors performing research 
services or participating in official Smithsonian 
presentations; and permitting the use of certain funds for the 
Victor Building.
    Language is included under Smithsonian Institution, 
facilities capital, permitting the Smithsonian Institution to 
select contractors for certain purposes on the basis of 
contractor qualifications as well as price.
    Language is included under Smithsonian Institution, 
Administrative provisions, precluding any changes to the 
Smithsonian science program without prior approval of the Board 
of Regents; limiting the design or expansion of current space 
or facilities without prior approval of the Committee; limiting 
the use of funds for the Holt House; limiting reprogramming of 
funds; and prohibiting purchase of buildings without prior 
consultation.
    Language is included under National Gallery of Art, 
Salaries and expenses, allowing payment in advance for 
membership in library, museum, and art associations or 
societies; providing uniform allowances and for restoration and 
repair of works of art by contract without advertising; and 
providing no-year availability of funds for special 
exhibitions.
    Language is included under National Gallery of Art, repair, 
restoration and renovation of buildings, permitting the Gallery 
to perform work by contract or otherwise and to select 
contractors for certain purposes on the basis of contractor 
qualifications as well as price.
    Language is included under National Endowment for the 
Humanities, Matching grants, allowing obligation of current and 
prior year funds of gifts, bequests, and devises of money for 
which equal amounts have not previously been appropriated.
    Language is included under National Foundation on the Arts 
and the Humanities, Administrative provisions, limiting the use 
of funds for grants and contracts which do not include the text 
of 18 U.S.C. 1913; requiring certain language in contracts and 
grants permitting the use of non-appropriated funds for 
reception expenses; and allowing the chairperson of the NEA to 
approve small grants under limited circumstances.
    Language is included under Commission of Fine Arts, 
Salaries and expenses, permitting the charging and use of fees 
for its publications.
    Language is included under Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation, Salaries and expenses, restricting hiring at 
Executive Level V or higher.
    Language is included under National Capital Planning 
Commission, Salaries and expenses, allowing certain funds to be 
used for official representation expenses.
    Language is included under Holocaust Memorial Council, 
providing no-year funding availability for repair and 
rehabilitation and museums exhibitions.
    Language is included under Title III--General Provisions, 
providing for availability of information on consulting 
services contracts; prohibiting the use of funds to distribute 
literature either to promote or oppose legislative proposals on 
which Congressional action is incomplete; specifying that funds 
are for one year unless provided otherwise prohibiting the use 
of funds to provide personal cooks, chauffeurs or other 
personal servants to any office or employee; prohibiting 
assessments against programs funded in this bill; and 
prohibiting the sale of giant sequoia trees in a manner 
different from 2004.
    Language is included under Title III--General Provisions, 
continuing a limitation on accepting and processing 
applications for patents and on the patenting of Federal lands; 
permitting processing of grandfathered applications; and 
permitting third-party contractors to process grandfathered 
applications.
    Language is included under Title III--General Provisions, 
limiting the use of funds for contract support costs on Indian 
contracts.
    Language is included under Title III--General Provisions, 
making reforms in the National Endowment for the Arts, 
including funding distribution reforms; permitting the National 
Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities to collect, invest 
and use private donations; limiting funds for completing or 
issuing the five-year program under the Forest and Rangeland 
Renewable Resources Planning Act; limiting the use of funds for 
any government-wide administrative functions; permiting limits 
on competition for certain Jobs-in-the-Woods activities; 
permitting the use of Forest Service road and trail funds for 
maintenance and forest health; limiting the use of telephone 
answering machines; clarifying use of the Knutson-Vandenburg 
reforestation fund.
    Language is included under Title III--General Provisions, 
prohibiting the Forest Service from using projects under the 
recreation fee demonstration program to supplant existing 
concessions and permitting the use of Forest land management 
plans pending completion of required revisions.
    Language is included under Title III--General Provisions, 
limiting leasing and preleasing activities within National 
Monuments; extending and expanding the pilot program allowing 
the Forest Service to dispose of certain excess structures and 
reinvest the proceeds for maintenance and rehabilitation; 
providing authority for the staff of Congressionally 
established foundations to use GSA contract airfare rates and 
Federal government hotel accommodation rates when on official 
business; providing the Secretary of the Interior and the 
Secretary of Agriculture the authority to enter into reciprocal 
agreements with foreign nations concerning the personal 
liability of firefighters; authorizing a demonstration program 
for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, which permits the Eagle 
Butte service unit to pay higher salaries and bonuses to 
attract health professionals; prohibiting the transfer of funds 
to other agencies other than provided in this Act; and limiting 
the use of funds to prepare or issue a permit or lease for oil 
or gas drilling in the Finger Lakes National Forest, NY.
    Language is included under Title III, General Provisions 
limiting funds on planning, design, and construction to 
Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House; providing 
contracting and grant authority for hazardous fuel projects in 
forest-dependent rural communities; providing certain 
limitation on funds for Federal land takings excluding 
Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion Act; amending 
the recreation fee program to restrict certain Forest Service 
uses.
    Language is included under Title III, General Provisions 
limiting the use of funds for competitive sourcing studies; 
prohibiting use of funds for certain government-wide 
activities; requiring display of certain information for 
government-wide activities in budget justification; providing 
for a small land exchange on the San Bernardino National 
Forest, and extending a cooperative hazardous fuels provision 
for the State of Colorado, the Forest Service and the Bureau of 
Land Management.

                  Appropriations Not Authorized by Law

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

                                             [Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Appropriations
                                         Last year of                              in last year   Appropriations
                                        authorization     Authorization level           of         in this bill
                                                                                   authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Endowment for the Arts.......          1993   ``Such sums as may be           $174,460        $120,972
                                                        necessary''.
National Endowment for the Humanities.          1993   ``Such sums as may be            177,413         138,499
                                                        necessary''.
Office of Navajo & Hopi Indian                  2000   $30,000..................          8,000          11,000
 Relocation.

     U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Resources Management:
    Endangered Species Act Amendments           1992   $41,500..................         35,721         138,590
     of 1988.
    Marine Mammal Protection Act                1999   $10,296..................          2,008           3,291
     Amendments of 1994.

         Department of Energy

Energy Information Administration 1992            NA   76,300...................         82,111          85,000
Office of Fossil Energy:
    Coal..............................          1997   ``Such sums as may be            149,629         201,600
                                                        necessary''.
    Enhanced Oil Recovery.............          1997   NA.......................         45,937          34,700
    Natural Gas.......................          1997   NA.......................         23,614          41,600
    Fuel Cells........................          1997   NA.......................         50,117          74,176
Energy Efficiency and Renewable
 Energy:
    Transportation R&D................;          1994   $160,000.................        176,000         238,356
    Buildings, Industry, and other R&D;          1994   $275,000.................        255,700         372,167
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

         Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

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

                          Full Committee Votes

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

          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 italics, existing law in which no change 
is proposed is shown in roman):

 SECTION 3 OF THE ACT OF JUNE 9, 1930 (COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ``KNUTSON-
                           VANDENBERG ACT'')


                            (16 U.S.C. 576b)

    Sec. 3. [The Secretary of Agriculture may, when in his] (a) 
The Secretary of Agriculture may, when in his or her judgment 
such action will be in the public interest, require any 
purchaser of national-forest timber to make deposits of money, 
in addition to the payments for the timber, to cover the cost 
to the United States of (1) planting (including the production 
or purchase of young trees), (2) sowing with tree seeds 
(including the collection or purchase of such seeds), (3) 
cutting, destroying, or otherwise removing undesirable trees or 
other growth, on the national-forest land cut over by the 
purchaser, in order to improve the future stand of timber, or 
(4) protecting and improving the future productivity of the 
renewable resources of the forest land on such sale area, 
including sale area improvement operations maintenance and 
construction, reforestation and wildlife habitat management. 
[Such deposits] Each of these 4 purposes shall be of equal 
priority.
    (b) Amounts deposited under subsection (a) shall be covered 
into the Treasury and shall constitute a special fund, which is 
hereby appropriated and made available until expended, to cover 
the cost to the United States of such tree planting, seed 
sowing, and forest improvement work, as the Secretary of 
Agriculture [may direct: Provided, That any portion of any 
deposit found to be in excess of the cost of doing said work 
shall, upon the determination that it is so in excess, be 
transferred to miscellaneous receipts forest reserve fund, as a 
national-forest receipt of the fiscal year in which such 
transfer is made: Provided further, That the Secretary of 
Agriculture] may direct. The Secretary of Agriculture is 
authorized, upon application of the Secretary of the Interior, 
to furnish seedlings and/or young trees for replanting of 
burned-over areas in any national park.
    (c) Any portion of the balance at the end of a fiscal year 
in the special fund established pursuant to this section that 
the Secretary of Agriculture determines to be in excess of the 
cost of doing work described in subsection (a) (as well as any 
portion of the balance in the special fund that the Secretary 
determined, before October 1, 2004, to be excess of the cost of 
doing work described in subsection (a), but which has not been 
transferred by that date) shall be transferred to miscellaneous 
receipts, National Forest Fund, as a National Forest receipt, 
but only if the Secretary also determines that--
          (1) the excess amounts will not be needed for 
        emergency wildfire suppression during the fiscal year 
        in which the transfer would be made; and
          (2) the amount to be transferred to miscellaneous 
        receipts, National Forest Fund, exceeds the outstanding 
        balance of unreimbursed funds transferred from the 
        special fund in prior fiscal years for wildfire 
        suppression.

  SECTION 315 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1996


         (As contained in section 101(c) of Public Law 104-134)

    Sec. 315. Recreational Fee Demonstration Program.--(a) The 
Secretary of the Interior (acting through the Bureau of Land 
Management, the National Park Service and the United States 
Fish and Wildlife Service) and the Secretary of Agriculture 
(acting through the Forest Service) shall each implement a fee 
program to demonstrate the feasibility of user-generated cost 
recovery for the operation and maintenance of recreation areas 
or sites and habitat enhancement projects on Federal lands.
    (b) In carrying out the pilot program established pursuant 
to this action, the appropriate Secretary shall select from 
areas under the jurisdiction of each of the four agencies 
referred to in subsection (a) areas, sites or projects for fee 
demonstration. For each such demonstration, the Secretary, 
subject to subsection (g) but notwithstanding any other 
provision of law--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (g) The Secretary of Agriculture may not charge or collect 
fees under this section for the following:
          (1) Admission to a unit of the National Forest System 
        (as defined in section 11(a) of the Forest and 
        Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (16 
        U.S.C. 1609(a)).
          (2) The use, either singly or in any combination, of 
        the following:
                  (A) Undesignated parking along roads.
                  (B) Overlook sites or scenic pullouts.
                  (C) Information offices and centers that only 
                provide general area information and limited 
                services or interpretive exhibits.
                  (D) Dispersed areas for which Federal 
                expenditures in the form of facilities or 
                services are limited.

  SECTION 331 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001

                          (Public Law 106-291)

    Sec. 331. Federal and State Cooperative Watershed 
Restoration and Protection in Colorado.--(a) Use of Colorado 
State Forest Service.--[Until September 30, 2004, the] The 
Secretary of Agriculture, via cooperative agreement or contract 
(including sole source contract) as appropriate, may permit the 
Colorado State Forest Service to perform watershed restoration 
and protection services on National Forest System lands in the 
State of Colorado when similar and complementary watershed 
restoration and protection services are being performed by the 
State Forest Service on adjacent State or private lands. The 
types of services that may be extended to National Forest 
System lands include treatment of insect infected trees, 
reduction of hazardous fuels, and other activities to restore 
or improve watersheds or fish and wildlife habitat across 
ownership boundaries.
    (b) State as Agency.--Except as provided in subsection (c), 
a cooperative agreement or contract under subsection (a) may 
authorize the State Forester of Colorado to serve as the agent 
for the Forest Service in providing all services necessary to 
facilitate the performance of watershed restoration and 
protection services under subsection (a). The services to be 
performed by the Colorado State Forest Service may be conducted 
with subcontracts utilizing State contract procedures. 
Subsections (d) and (g) of section 14 of the National Forest 
Management Act of 1976 (16 U.S.C. 472a) shall not apply to 
services performed under a cooperative agreement or contract 
under subsection (a).
    (c) Retention of NEPA Responsibilities.--With respect to 
any watershed restoration and protection services on National 
Forest System lands proposed for performance by the Colorado 
State Forest Service under subsection (a), any decision 
required to be made under the National Environmental Policy Act 
of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) may not be delegated to the 
State Forester of Colorado or any other officer or employee of 
the Colorado State Forest Service.
    (d) Inclusion of Colorado BLM Lands.--The authority 
provided by this section shall also be available to the 
Secretary of the Interior with respect to public lands in the 
State of Colorado administered by the Secretary through the 
Bureau of Land Management.
    (e) Expiration of Authority.--The authority of the 
Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to 
enter into cooperative agreements and contracts under this 
section expires September 30, 2009, and the term of any 
cooperative agreement or contract entered into under this 
section shall not extend beyond that date.

                    Five-Year Projection of Outlays

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

                              [In millions]



Budget authority (discretionary)......................            19,999
Outlays:
    Fiscal year 2005..................................            13,729
    Fiscal year 2006..................................             4,193
    Fiscal year 2007..................................             1,402
    Fiscal year 2008..................................               622
    Fiscal year 2009 and future years.................               257


               Assistance to State and Local Governments

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

                              [In millions]



New budget authority..................................             2,355
Fiscal year 2005 outlays resulting therefrom..........             1,541


                                                        
                                                        

             MINORITY VIEWS OF DAVID OBEY AND NORMAN DICKS

    This Interior appropriations bill demonstrates the fact 
that the Majority party Budget Resolution passed by the House 
is at war with the Administration's fiscal pretensions in a 
fundamental way. Notwithstanding the damage which is caused by 
this reality, the Minority appreciates the cooperative manner 
in which the fiscal year 2005 Interior Appropriations bill has 
been handled. We have been consulted throughout the process and 
many of our priorities are reflected in the bill. In 
particular, we are strongly supportive of the decision to 
include $500 million of emergency fire funding for both the 
2004 and 2005 budget seasons. In addition, we appreciate the 
Chairman's assurance that additional funds will be sought to 
make sure our parks, refuges and forests are adequately 
staffed. We also appreciate that many of the irresponsible cuts 
proposed by the President in high-priority areas such as Indian 
schools and health facilities were rejected. This substantive 
approach to the Committee's work is laudable.
    The Minority, however, remains concerned that the Interior 
bill is inadequate in a number of areas. This is largely 
because the allocation provided to the Subcommittee is simply 
insufficient to address the Subcommittee's many 
responsibilities. Quite simply:
           Bad Budget Resolutions result in bad 302(a) 
        allocations of discretionary funding to the Committee;
           Bad 302(a) allocations lead to bad 302(b) 
        allocations to the Subcommittees;
           Bad 302(b) allocations to the Subcommittees 
        lead to disappointing bills.
    The House Majority passed a Budget Resolution that gave 
priority to tax cuts for wealthy Americans over making critical 
investments that benefit American families. Now the 
Appropriations Committee is faced with the reality of providing 
the services that our citizens expect without adequate 
resources. The Interior bill is a poster child for this 
reality. The bill is $257 million below last year and $220 
million below the President's request. This means inadequate 
services in our national parks, refuges and forests; inadequate 
funding to protect open spaces and wildlife for future 
generations; inadequate investments in energy research; and 
inadequate support for this country's arts and humanities.
    Beyond the funding shortfalls, we do not agree with the 
Majority in several policy areas of the bill. In particular, we 
fundamentally disagree with the ideologically-driven opposition 
to land acquisition. This bill rejects every one of the 75 land 
acquisition projects requested by the President. Unfortunately, 
our amendment to restore land acquisition funding to the level 
requested by the Administration was rejected during Full 
Committee consideration of the bill. Nor do we agree with the 
low priority that the Majority places on conservation related 
grant programs at the Department of the Interior. Supporting 
State and local efforts to preserve precious open spaces and 
wildlife are entirely appropriate and part of a healthy 
conservation partnership.
    We are also disappointed that the House Majority has broken 
the bi-partisan promise on conservation. We are still adding up 
the damage, but it looks like funding for programs covered by 
the Conservation Trust Fund is $850 million below the $1.7 
billion that was promised four years ago. That means:
           Less for preserving open spaces and critical 
        historic lands from development,
           Less for support of wildlife programs,
           Less for preservation of wetlands,
           Less for historic preservation, and
           Less for assistance to state and local 
        governments under the PILT program to replace lost 
        revenue from lands already owned by the federal 
        government.
    The Republican Leadership of this Committee was forced to 
recognize that the President submitted a pretend budget that 
finances worthwhile increases with unrealistic cuts. A 
responsible Congress is not going to cut funding for Indian 
schools construction by $66 million. The House is not going to 
cut funding for Indian hospitals and clinics construction by 
$53 million, and we are not going to terminate $240 million of 
on-going energy research programs. The Committee did the right 
thing in restoring these irresponsible cuts. To live within the 
Republican Budget Resolution, almost $700 million of the 
Administration's ``let's pretend'' initiatives had to be cut, 
including:
           $50 million of increases championed by the 
        First Lady for cultural programs at the National 
        Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities and at the 
        National Park Service.
           $170 million more for land acquisition at 
        our parks, wildlife refuges and forests.
           The Interior Secretary's proposed increases 
        for state wildlife grants and for other conservation 
        grant programs.
           The Forest Service Chief's proposal to 
        expand the Forest Legacy program.
           The Energy Secretary's FutureGen proposal 
        for a state of the art clean and efficient coal-powered 
        electricity plant has great potential and should be 
        funded at levels adequate to fully develop this 
        concept.
    As the bill moves forward in the legislative process in the 
House and later in the Senate and the Conference Committee, we 
intend to support efforts to address many of the shortcomings 
in the bill. In particular, we intend to support efforts to 
more adequately fund the arts and the humanities, to provide 
additional resources for the operational costs of our parks and 
refuges, and to provide additional funds for conservation of 
open spaces and wildlife.

                                   David Obey.
                                   Norman D. Dicks.