Report text available as:

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

109th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     109-465

======================================================================
 
     DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATION BILL, 2007

                                _______
                                

  May 15, 2006.--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

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 5386]

    The Committee on Appropriations submits the following 
report in explanation of the accompanying bill making 
appropriations for the Department of the Interior, 
Environmental Protection Agency, and Related Agencies for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 2007. The bill provides 
regular annual appropriations for the Department of the 
Interior (except the Bureau of Reclamation), the Environmental 
Protection Agency, and for other related agencies, including 
the Forest Service, the Indian Health Service, the Smithsonian 
Institution, and the National Foundation on the Arts and the 
Humanities.

                                CONTENTS

_______________________________________________________________________


                                                            Page number

                                                            Bill Report
TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR:
        Bureau of Land Management..........................     2
                                                                      9
        United States Fish and Wildlife Service............    11
                                                                     24
        National Park Service..............................    19
                                                                     37
        United States Geological Survey....................    27
                                                                     55
        Minerals Management Service........................    30
                                                                     61
        Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 
            Enforcement....................................    32
                                                                     65
        Bureau of Indian Affairs...........................    34
                                                                     69
        Departmental Offices...............................    43
                                                                     79
        General Provisions, Department of the Interior.....    51
                                                                     90
TITLE II--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY:
        Science and Technology.............................    63
                                                                     94
        Environmental Programs and Management..............    63
                                                                    101
        Office of Inspector General........................    64
                                                                    113
        Buildings and Facilities...........................    65
                                                                    115
        Hazardous Substance Superfund......................    65
                                                                    117
        Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program...........    66
                                                                    123
        Oil Spill Response.................................    66
                                                                    127
        State and Tribal Assistance Grants.................    66
                                                                    129
        Administrative Provisions..........................    72
                                                                    139
        General Provisions, Environmental Protection Agency    73

TITLE III--RELATED AGENCIES:
        Forest Service, USDA...............................    73
                                                                    139
        Indian Health Service, DHHS........................    88
                                                                    165
        National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences    96
                                                                    173
        Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry...    96
                                                                    173
        Other Related Agencies:............................    98
                                                                    174
        Council on Environmental Quality and Office of 
            Environmental Quality..........................    98
                                                                    174
        Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.....    98
                                                                    175
        Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation........    99
                                                                    175
        Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native 
            Culture and Arts Development...................   100
                                                                    176
        Smithsonian Institution............................   100
                                                                    176
        National Gallery of Art............................   104
                                                                    181
        John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.....   106
                                                                    183
        Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars...   106
                                                                    184
        National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities.   106
                                                                    184
        Commission of Fine Arts............................   109
                                                                    188
        Advisory Council on Historic Preservation..........   109
                                                                    189
        National Capital Planning Commission...............   110
                                                                    189
        United States Holocaust Memorial Museum............   110
                                                                    189
        Presidio Trust.....................................   111
                                                                    190
        White House Commission on the National Moment of 
            Remembrance....................................   111
                                                                    190
TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS...............................   111
                                                                    190
TITLE V--SUSPENSION OF ROYALTY RELIEF......................   126
                                                                    192

                   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................................          25,889              54          25,889              58
Outlays.........................................          26,906              54          26,906              58
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          Summary of the Bill

    The Committee has conducted hearings on the programs and 
projects provided for in the Interior, Environment, and Related 
Agencies Appropriations bill for 2007. The hearings are 
contained in 8 published volumes totaling over 10,000 pages.
    During the course of the hearings, testimony was taken at 
12 hearings on 10 days, not only from agencies which come under 
the jurisdiction of the Interior Subcommittee, but also from 
private citizens, and, in written form, from Members of 
Congress, State and local government officials, and private 
citizens.
    The bill that is recommended for fiscal year 2007 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 2007   fiscal year 2007   budget estimates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I, Department of the Interior: New Budget             $9,612,568,000     $9,664,186,000       +$51,618,000
 (obligational) authority..............................
Title II, Environmental Protection Agency: New Budget        7,315,475,000      7,572,870,000       +257,395,000
 (obligational) authority..............................
Title III, related agencies: New Budget (obligational)       8,604,072,000      8,707,069,000       +102,997,000
 authority.............................................
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
    Grand total, New Budget (obligational) authority...     25,532,115,000     25,944,125,000       +412,010,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Appropriations for the Department of the Interior, Environmental 
                Protection Agency, 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 2006, these activities are 
estimated to total $3,568,891,000. The estimate for fiscal year 
2007 is $3,658,910,000.
    The following table reflects the total budget 
(obligational) authority contained both in this bill and in 
permanent appropriations for fiscal years 2006 and 2007.

  DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, AND RELATED AGENCIES TOTAL BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR
                                             FISCAL YEARS 2006-2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Item                            Fiscal year 2006   Fiscal year 2007        Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interior, environment, and related agencies                $26,085,934,000    $25,944,125,000      -$141,809,000
 appropriations bill...................................
Permanent appropriations, Federal funds................      3,045,310,000      3,169,787,000       +124,477,000
Permanent appropriations, trust funds..................        578,600,000        641,809,000        +63,209,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
    Total budget authority.............................     29,711,612,000     29,755,721,000        +44,109,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Revenue Generated by Agencies in Bill

    The following tabulation indicates total new obligational 
authority to date for fiscal years 2005 and 2006, and the 
amount recommended in the bill for fiscal year 2007. It 
compares receipts generated by activities in this bill on an 
actual basis for fiscal year 2005 and on an estimated basis for 
fiscal years 2006 and 2007. The programs in this bill are 
estimated to generate $17 billion in revenues for the Federal 
Government in fiscal year 2007. Therefore, the expenditures in 
this bill will contribute to economic stability rather than 
inflation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Fiscal year--
                          Item                          --------------------------------------------------------
                                                                2005               2006               2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New obligational authority.............................    $27,017,724,000    $26,087,702,000    $25,944,125,000
Receipts:
    Department of the Interior.........................     12,362,043,000     16,543,864,000     16,628,022,000
    Forest Service.....................................        506,251,000        365,870,000        369,020,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
        Total receipts.................................     12,868,294,000     16,909,734,000     16,997,042,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   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 
2007, 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, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 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, Environment, 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, 
National fish hatcheries, National wildlife refuges, research 
units, regional, State and other administrative units and the 
like, for which funds are provided in fiscal year 2007.
    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 $5.9 billion for Indian programs in this 
bill in fiscal year 2007. This is an increase of $62 million 
above the budget request and an increase of $204 million above 
the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2006. Spending for 
Indian services by the Federal Government in total is included 
in the following table.

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                 FY 2007 budget
                     Approps bills                         FY 2005 actual    FY 2006 enacted        request
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Agriculture..............................            941,973            948,068            954,969
Army Corps of Engineers................................             23,798             22,829             22,829
Department of Commerce.................................             30,046             23,524             23,524
Department of Defense..................................             18,000             18,000                237
Department of Education................................          2,514,369          2,561,947          2,592,639
Department of Health & Human Services..................          4,390,986          4,480,692          4,646,339
Department of Housing & Urban Development..............            641,392            686,668            689,040
Department of the Interior.............................          2,918,680          2,832,497          2,819,962
Department of Justice..................................            219,855            228,639            230,295
Department of Labor....................................             89,032             67,804             64,066
Department of Transportation...........................            315,153            348,594            388,897
Department of Veterans Affairs.........................                567                325                615
Environmental Protection Agency........................            238,988            220,998            202,555
Small Business Administration..........................              3,500              4,347              4,200
Smithsonian Institution................................             49,047             51,280             53,428
Department of the Treasury.............................              4,000              4,000                  0
Other Agencies & Independent Agencies..................            148,733            166,249             40,108
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
    Grand Total........................................         12,528,119         12,667,771         12,733,703
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        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.

                        Reprogramming Guidelines

    The Committee has revised the reprogramming guidelines to 
modify the threshold and approval requirements for the National 
Park Service construction account. This added flexibility is 
provided in light of the volatile nature of the construction 
market and the need to manage projects in a timely way 
consistent with the contracting requirements of the Federal 
Acquisition Regulations.
    The following are the procedures governing reprogramming 
actions for programs and activities funded in the Interior, 
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act:
    1. Definitions.--
          (a) ``Reprogramming,'' as defined in these 
        procedures, includes the reallocation of funds from one 
        budget activity to another. In cases where either the 
        House or Senate Committee report displays an allocation 
        of an appropriation below the activity level, that more 
        detailed level shall be the basis for reprogramming. 
        For construction accounts, a reprogramming constitutes 
        the reallocation of funds from one construction project 
        (identified in the justification or Committee report) 
        to another. A reprogramming shall also consist of any 
        significant departure from the program described in the 
        agency's budget justifications. This includes proposed 
        reorganizations even without a change in funding.
          (b) ``Committees'' refer to the House and Senate 
        Committees on Appropriations and, specifically, the 
        Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related 
        Agencies.
    2. Guidelines for Reprogramming.--
          (a) A reprogramming should be made only when an 
        unforeseen situation arises; and then only if 
        postponement of the project or the activity until the 
        next appropriation year would result in actual loss or 
        damage. Mere convenience or desire should not be 
        factors for consideration.
          (b) Any project or activity, which may be deferred 
        through reprogramming, shall not later be accomplished 
        by means of further reprogramming; but, instead, funds 
        should again be sought for the deferred project or 
        activity through the regular appropriations process.
          (c) Reprogramming should not be employed to initiate 
        new programs or to change allocations specifically 
        denied, limited or increased by the Congress in the Act 
        or the report. In cases where unforeseen events or 
        conditions are deemed to require changes, proposals 
        shall be submitted in advance to the Committees, 
        regardless of amounts involved, and be fully explained 
        and justified.
          (d) Reprogramming proposals submitted to the 
        Committees for approval shall be considered approved 30 
        calendar days after receipt if the Committees have 
        posed no objection. However, agencies will be expected 
        to extend the approval deadline if specifically 
        requested by either Committee.
          (e) Proposed changes to estimated working capital 
        fund bills and estimated overhead charges, deductions, 
        reserves or holdbacks, as such estimates were presented 
        in annual budget justifications, shall be submitted 
        through the reprogramming process.
    3. Criteria and Exceptions.--Any proposed reprogramming 
must be submitted to the Committees in writing prior to 
implementation if it exceeds $500,000 annually or results in an 
increase or decrease of more than 10 percent annually in 
affected programs, with the following exceptions:
          (a) With regard to the tribal priority allocations 
        activity of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Operation of 
        Indian Programs account, there is no restriction on 
        reprogrammings among the programs within this activity. 
        However, the Bureau shall report on all reprogrammings 
        made during the first 6 months of the fiscal year by no 
        later than May 1 of each year, and shall provide a 
        final report of all reprogrammings for the previous 
        fiscal year by no later than November 1 of each year.
          (b) With regard to the Environmental Protection 
        Agency, State and Tribal Assistance Grants account, 
        reprogramming requests associated with States and 
        Tribes applying for partnership grants do not need to 
        be submitted to the Committees for approval should such 
        grants exceed the normal reprogramming limitations. In 
        addition, the Agency need not submit a request to move 
        funds between wastewater and drinking water objectives 
        for those grants targeted to specific communities.
          (c) With regard to National Park Service 
        construction, the threshold is $2,000,000 or 25 percent 
        per project. For actions between $500,000 and 
        $2,000,000, or between 10 and 25 percent, the Service 
        should notify the Committee when it redirects dollars 
        between projects or reduces the scope in order to 
        accomplish contract awards. Reallocations that will 
        result in a project cancellation or deferral must be 
        submitted in writing through the Department. In lieu of 
        scope reductions, the Service may apply other non-
        operational funding resources towards the 
        implementation of a construction project if the use of 
        such funds has been approved through the normal 
        requirements for the other fund sources (such as 
        recreation or concessions fees, Federal Lands Highways 
        funds or maintenance improvement funds) and the 
        aggregate application is within these reprogramming 
        thresholds.
    4. Quarterly Reports.--
          (a) All reprogrammings shall be reported to the 
        Committees quarterly and shall include cumulative 
        totals.
          (b) Any significant shifts of funding among object 
        classifications also should be reported to the 
        Committees.
    5. Administrative Overhead Accounts.--For all 
appropriations where costs of administrative expenses are 
funded in part from `assessments' of various budget activities 
within an appropriation, the assessments shall be shown in 
justifications under the discussion of administrative expenses.
    6. Contingency Accounts.--For all appropriations where 
assessments are made against various budget activities or 
allocations for contingencies the Committees expect a full 
explanation, as part of the budget justification, consistent 
with section 405 of this Act. The explanation shall show the 
amount of the assessment, the activities assessed, and the 
purpose of the fund. The Committees expect reports each year 
detailing the use of these funds. In no case shall a fund be 
used to finance projects and activities disapproved or limited 
by Congress or to finance new permanent positions or to finance 
programs or activities that could be foreseen and included in 
the normal budget review process. Contingency funds shall not 
be used to initiate new programs.
    7. Report Language.--Any limitation, directive, or 
earmarking contained in either the House or Senate report which 
is not contradicted by the other report nor specifically denied 
in the conference report shall be considered as having been 
approved by both Houses of Congress.
    8. Assessments.--No assessments shall be levied against any 
program, budget activity, subactivity, or project funded by the 
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act 
unless such assessments and the basis therefore are presented 
to the Committees and are approved by such Committees, in 
compliance with these procedures.
    9. Land Acquisitions and Forest Legacy.--
          (a) Lands shall not be acquired for more than the 
        approved appraised value (as addressed in section 
        301(3) of Public Law 91-646) except for condemnations 
        and declarations of taking, unless such acquisitions 
        are submitted to the Committees for approval in 
        compliance with these procedures.
          (b) Subsection (a) does not apply to the National 
        Park Service for tracts with an appraised value of 
        $500,000 or less.
    10. Land Exchanges.--Land exchanges, wherein the estimated 
value of the Federal lands to be exchanged is greater than 
$500,000, shall not be consummated until the Committees have 
had a 30-day period in which to examine the proposed exchange.
    11. Appropriations Structure.--The appropriation structure 
for any agency shall not be altered without advance approval of 
the Committees.

              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 2007 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 budget 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) reductions to Indian health, 
welfare and education programs are unacceptable; (4) critical 
forest health programs must be continued; (5) 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.
    The 9 largest agencies in this bill have absorbed about 
$800 million in pay costs and over $440 million in other fixed 
cost increases, such as rent, utility, and fuel costs, over the 
past 6 years. As a result, the 9 largest agencies in the bill 
have received over $1.2 billion in ``hidden'' decreases over 
the 6-year period from 2001 through 2006. These fixed cost and 
other funding absorptions have had a dramatic effect on 
critical staffing for the land management agencies in 
particular. For example, over the past 2 years, the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service has lost 600 staff, which equates to a 7% 
staffing reduction. Fixed cost absorption by the remaining 28 
smaller agencies and accounts in the bill is also creating 
program and staffing shortfalls in those agencies. The 
Committee urges the Administration to fund full pay and fixed 
cost increases in each future budget request to stem the 
staffing and program declines experienced by the agencies 
throughout the bill.
    Reductions to programs in Indian Country, including 
education grants, welfare, road maintenance, fire protection 
and Indian school and hospital construction funding have been 
restored to the maximum extent possible given the overall 
funding available in the Committee's recommendations for fiscal 
year 2007. The budget documents continue to indicate that talks 
regarding a possible settlement of the Cobell case. However, 
there has been a continued use of Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
Operation of Indian Programs (OIP) appropriation to pay for 
ongoing litigation support costs. This, does not in anyway, 
maintain our commitment to American Indian and Alaska Natives 
and the critically needed education and health programs that 
are central to our ability to meet those commitments.
    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 2007 budget recommendations. Each agency funded in 
the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies bill needs to 
examine its way of doing business in these constrained fiscal 
times and focus on its core, proven programs and on better 
management of resources.

                  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 
and nearly 13 million livestock animal unit months on 214 
million acres of public rangeland, and manages rangelands and 
facilities for 56,000 wild horses and burros, 261 million acres 
of wildlife habitat, and over 117,000 miles of fisheries 
habitat. Grazing receipts are estimated to be about $14.8 
million in fiscal year 2007, the same as the estimate for 
fiscal year 2006 and actual receipts of $14.5 million in fiscal 
year 2005. 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 collections (including salvage) are 
estimated to be $47.0 million in fiscal year 2007 compared to 
estimated collections of $33.7 million in fiscal year 2006 and 
actual collections of $26.9 million in fiscal year 2005. 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, 2006...........................      $847,632,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       863,244,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       867,738,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +20,106,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        +4,494,000
    The Committee recommends $867,738,000 for management of 
lands and resources, $4,494,000 above the budget request and 
$20,106,000 above the fiscal year 2006 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 $187,231,000 for 
land resources, $350,000 above the budget request and $382,000 
below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. Changes from the 
budget request include increases of: $700,000 in the soil, 
water and air management subactivity for the Upper San Pedro 
River, AZ, partnership; $500,000 in range management for 
invasive species work; $400,000 in forestry as a general 
increase; and $250,000 in riparian management to work on the 
Santa Ana River wash project, CA. The recommendation includes a 
decrease of $1,500,000 in cultural resources management for the 
requested new cultural resources enhancement initiative. The 
Committee recommends that the Bureau's managers of the Southern 
Nevada Public Lands Act projects consider a grant application 
for hydroacoustic mapping of Lake Tahoe which would aid the 
lake conservation effort.
    Wildlife and Fisheries.--The Committee recommends 
$40,805,000 for wildlife and fisheries as requested, an 
increase of $325,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. 
The Committee notes that the funding limit for the National 
Fish and Wildlife Foundation matching fund program is reduced 
to $2,750,000, a reduction of $250,000 below the request.
    Threatened and Endangered Species.--The Committee 
recommends $21,435,000 for threatened and endangered species as 
requested, an increase of $181,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.
    Recreation Management.--The Committee recommends 
$67,015,000 for recreation management, $3,250,000 above the 
budget request and $1,884,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level. The wilderness subactivity includes $500,000 
above the request to offset the requested program reduction. 
Changes from the budget request in recreation resources 
management include increases of: $500,000 for the San Jacinto 
and Santa Rosa National Monument plan implementation; $500,000 
for implementation of various California desert plans; $250,000 
for Imperial Dunes management, CA; $500,000 above the base for 
operation of various national scenic and historic trails, and a 
$1,000,000 general increase to assist management of units of 
the national landscape conservation system.
    The Committee directs the Bureau to include in subsequent 
budget justifications a clear exposition of funding requests in 
all subactivities and accomplishments of the trails system as 
well as the Bureau's participation in the system of national 
scenic and historic trails. The Committee expects that the 
funding increase for national scenic and historic trails will 
become part of the base requested in the future.
    Energy and Minerals.--The Committee recommends $133,005,000 
for energy and minerals, $1,700,000 below the budget request 
and $24,848,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The 
recommendation includes the full increases requested for energy 
programs and projects, including increases, above the enacted, 
of $9,244,000 for energy permitting at non-pilot offices, 
$3,300,000 for oil shale leasing, $425,000 for gas hydrates, 
and $739,000 for National Petroleum Reserve Alaska well 
capping. The Committee recommendation reduces the request for 
Alaska north slope oil and gas energy by $2,500,000; this 
reduction should be taken from the remediation of old wells. 
The Committee notes that this recommendation therefore includes 
$9,900,000 above the enacted funding level for exploration and 
development of energy located on Alaska's north slope, 
including the National Petroleum Reserve and the Alaska 
National Wildlife Refuge, if authorized. The other minerals 
subactivity includes an increase of $800,000 above the request 
to facilitate development of policy and operations for potash 
and oil and gas development in New Mexico. As requested, funds 
are not provided for the Alaska minerals subactivity.
    Realty and Ownership Management.--The Committee recommends 
$82,816,000 for realty and ownership management, $300,000 above 
the budget request and $6,162,000 below the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level. This includes a $200,000 reduction, which is 
funding transferred to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, for the 
Nez Perce Tribe/Snake River water rights settlement. The 
recommendation includes $500,000 above the request to help 
implement sections 121 and 122 of the Steens Mountain Act (P.L. 
106-399). The Committee urges the Bureau to comply with the 
Steens Mountain Act and allow landowner, lessee and inholder 
access to their property within the boundary of the Steens 
Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area, OR.
    Resource Protection and Maintenance.--The Committee 
recommends $85,175,000 for resource protection and maintenance, 
$1,544,000 above the budget request and $817,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The Committee recommendation 
includes an increase of $1,000,000 to the base for law 
enforcement activities along the southwestern border in New 
Mexico, Arizona, and California, and a general program increase 
of $544,000. The Committee notes that the Bureau's base budget 
includes previous funding increases for California desert 
rangers, a vital public service because of the incredibly high 
seasonal use of public lands in California.
    Transportation and Facilities Maintenance.--The Committee 
recommends $75,631,000 for transportation and facilities 
maintenance, $250,000 above the budget request and $1,015,000 
below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The $250,000 increase 
within the annual maintenance subactivity is to enhance the 
system of National scenic and historic trails.
    Land and Resource Information Systems.--The Committee 
recommends $17,585,000 for land and resource information 
systems, the same as the budget request and $364,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    Mining Law Administration.--The Committee recommends 
$32,696,000 for mining law administration as requested. 
Offsetting fees are equal to the amount made available to 
support this activity.
    Workforce and Organizational Support.--The Committee 
recommends $147,183,000 for workforce and organizational 
support, the same as the budget request and $1,737,000 above 
the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    Challenge Cost Share.--The Committee recommends $9,857,000 
for the Bureau's traditional challenge cost share program, the 
same as the fiscal year 2006 enacted funding level and $500,000 
above the budget request. The Committee notes that the Bureau 
has very successfully used this funding to leverage private 
contributions and provide numerous projects which enhance 
public lands and public service.
    Bill language.--Language is included in Title IV.--General 
Provisions concerning E-government initiatives and competitive 
sourcing studies.

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $755,286,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       769,560,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       769,253,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +13,967,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................          -307,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $769,253,000 for wildland fire 
management, $307,000 below the budget request and $13,967,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The appropriation 
includes $274,801,000 for preparedness, $257,041,000 for fire 
suppression operations, $199,787,000 for hazardous fuels 
reduction, $24,286,000 for burned area rehabilitation, 
$7,338,000 for fire facilities and $6,000,000 for the joint 
fire science program.
    The Committee is concerned that the Forest Service and the 
Department of the Interior do not have a suitable or 
comprehensive plan and strategy to deal with the Nation's 
wildfire management needs. The previous momentum for the 
national fire plan seems to have waned within the 
Administration based on the selective recognition of its main 
features. Accordingly, the Committee directs the wildland fire 
management council, in partnership with the State wildfire 
agencies, to develop and implement a comprehensive and cohesive 
strategy that identifies long-term options and funding needed 
to respond to wildfire needs. This strategy should incorporate 
previous documents suggested by the States, and should indicate 
how the various planning tools, such as fire program analysis 
and LANDFIRE, fit. The strategy should address all four of the 
original national fire plan goals, as well as the research and 
development needs and management needs required to support this 
effort. As a beginning, the Committee requires a report by the 
two departments, by January 31, 2007, providing the tactical 
details on how this fundamental plan, with associated funding 
needs, will be produced by June 30, 2007.
    Wildfire Preparedness.--The Committee recommends 
$274,801,000 for wildfire preparedness as requested, an 
increase of $5,962,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level. The Committee is concerned that the Department maintains 
sufficient readiness with its preparedness program. 
Accordingly, bill language is provided in Title IV, which 
limits competitive sourcing activities for wildfire program 
activities. While contracting is encouraged for wildfire 
management activities, at this time it is not warranted to 
spend limited resources and time to fulfill competitive 
sourcing quotas. The Committee also expects that the Department 
will be very cautious in using limited preparedness funding for 
its ready reserve program, and only provide Federal funds to 
support non-Federal firefighters where it is clear that there 
are measurable benefits.
    The Committee is very concerned about the cost and utility 
of the fire program analysis system that is being jointly 
developed with the Forest Service. It is not clear why this 
system is so expensive, and furthermore, it is not clear that 
the system being developed will actually be useful for its 
original purpose of determining the most cost efficient and 
effective distribution of firefighting resources. The overall 
goals of the system still are important to achieve so the 
Committee is not prepared at this time to halt development. 
However, the Committee has included bill language which limits 
funding for this effort unless and until the Secretary of the 
Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture certify in writing 
that the fire program analysis system will be completed in a 
timely fashion and include the full participation of State 
partners. The Committee understands that expert, independent 
technical reviews are currently underway, but it is especially 
critical that management participate at a high level to ensure 
the public that overarching goals are attainable in a cost 
effective manner.
    Wildfire Suppression Operations.--The Committee recommends 
$257,041,000 for wildfire suppression operations as requested, 
an increase of $26,320,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
funding level. The Committee recommendation fully meets the 10-
year average expenditure which actually occurred, adjusted for 
inflation. The Committee remains concerned about the high costs 
of large fire incidents. The Department of the Interior, along 
with the Forest Service, should ensure that cost containment is 
an important priority when suppressing wildland fires. 
Therefore, the Committee directs the Department of the Interior 
and the Forest Service to continue reports required previously 
and to examine, using independent panels, any individual 
wildfire incident which results in expenses greater than 
$10,000,000.
    Hazardous Fuels.--The Committee has provided $199,787,000 
for hazardous fuels reduction work as requested, a decrease of 
$8,326,000 below the fiscal year 2006 level. Within the 
allocation, the Committee directs that no less than $4,500,000 
be used for fire safe councils and community-based projects in 
California; this funding level is similar to that provided in 
earlier years for this important partnership.
    The Committee commends the Department for its work on the 
hazardous fuels program but it is still not clear that funding 
is being used to address the Nation's highest priority fuels 
projects. The Committee continues to stress that the Department 
must coordinate all hazardous fuels activities with the 
Department of Agriculture, State fire agencies, and community 
wildfire protection plans. The Committee expects the Department 
to provide a report to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations before distributing funds to the bureaus which 
indicates clearly how funding is prioritized and allocated to 
bureaus, to regions or States, and to projects. Furthermore, 
all subsequent budget justifications for this program should 
clearly indicate the budget formulation process and provide the 
recommended funding split and projected accomplishments by 
bureau, and by region or State. The Committee reiterates its 
previous directions for the Department of the Interior and the 
Department of Agriculture to have a common hazardous fuels 
allocation process to ensure funding goes to areas which 
protect communities, lives, property, and ecosystems, and which 
rewards successful field units that design projects in 
accordance with community wildfire protection plans or their 
equivalent and includes partnerships with States and others. 
The Departments need to implement in fiscal year 2007 
additional program metrics beyond merely acres treated; these 
metrics must account for important tactical goals including 
protection of communities and populations, as well as 
mechanical treatments and biomass removed.
    Rehabilitation.--The Committee recommends $24,286,000 as 
requested for the burned area rehabilitation and restoration 
program, an increase of $170,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level. The Committee notes that this funds the native 
plant materials program at the fiscal year 2006 level. The 
Committee encourages the Department and the Bureau to direct 
the native plant program to work closely with other programs 
which disrupt vegetation, especially the oil and gas program.
    State and Local Fire Assistance.--The Committee has 
accepted the Administration's request to eliminate funding for 
the State and local fire assistance program. However, the 
Committee has accordingly increased the funding for volunteer 
and State fire assistance within the Forest Service wildland 
fire management appropriation. The Committee expects that the 
Forest Service will work closely with Interior bureaus to 
ensure that assistance funding goes for the most meritorious 
State and local fire department projects. These rural and local 
fire units are extremely important for the Nation's readiness 
and they should be commended for their hard work and success at 
initial attack and shared participation during emergencies. The 
Committee also expects that fire assistance provided through 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency will carefully consider 
the needs and success of rural fire assistance providers.
    Fire Facilities.--The Committee has provided $7,338,000 for 
fire facilities, a decrease of $396,000 below both the request 
and the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. This reduction 
eliminates the last project on the budget justification project 
list; this project should be considered under the Southern 
Nevada Public Lands Act.
    Joint Fire Sciences Program.--The Committee has provided 
$6,000,000 for the joint fire science program, an increase of 
$89,000 above both the request and the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level. The Committee stresses that it is vital that both the 
Interior Department and the Forest Service work on these 
research efforts jointly, and that the program continue to 
stress practical solutions and collaborate with the Nation's 
forestry schools and other partners.
    Bill Language.--Language is included under the wildland 
fire management account as in previous years. Additional 
language is included in Title IV, which limits funding for the 
fire program analysis system unless both Secretaries of 
Interior and Agriculture certify that this project will be 
completed in a timely manner and will include State partners, 
and which limits competitive sourcing for wildland fire 
management.

                              CONSTRUCTION
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $11,750,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         6,476,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        11,476,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          -274,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        +5,000,000
    The Committee recommends $11,476,000 for construction, 
$5,000,000 above the budget request and $274,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The increase above the budget 
request is for the Santa Ana River wash cooperative 
conservation program with the County of San Bernardino, CA.

                            LAND ACQUISITION
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $8,621,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         8,767,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         3,067,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        -5,554,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        -5,700,000
    The Committee recommends $3,067,000 for land acquisition, a 
decrease of $5,554,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level, and a decrease of $5,700,000 below the budget estimate.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:
  
Coachella Valley, CA..................................          $500,000
                                                       -----------------
    Subtotal..........................................           500,000
Acquisition Management................................         1,567,000
Emergencies and Hardships.............................         1,000,000
                                                       -----------------
        Total.........................................        $3,067,000
                   OREGON AND CALIFORNIA GRANT LANDS
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $108,451,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       112,408,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       111,408,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +2,957,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        -1,000,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $111,408,000 for the Oregon and 
California grant lands, $1,000,000 below the budget request and 
$2,957,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                           RANGE IMPROVEMENTS
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        10,000,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        10,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 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. The 
Committee has retained bill language as in previous years even 
though the Administration had requested its deletion. 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 $25,483,000, 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

    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.

          ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS, BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

    The Committee recommendation includes the administrative 
provisions as requested, plus a new provision which allows 
refunds or rebates received on an ongoing basis from an 
information technology vender to be deposited into the Bureau's 
management of lands and resources fund to be used to offset the 
Bureau's costs incurred in providing this service. The 
requested provisions includes a new item which provides a 
technical change to mining law which clarifies the time of day 
annual work on claims must be registered, and extending claim 
maintenance fees.

                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 545-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.
    Throughout the Service's budget, the Committee has 
recommended reductions to grant programs in order to restore 
funding for mission-essential Federal programs managed by the 
Service. This was a difficult but necessary decision to slow 
the staffing decline the Service has experienced over the past 
two years. Given the constrained allocation for fiscal year 
2007, the Committee cannot sustain past levels for grant 
programs at the expense of mission-essential programs.

                          RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................    $1,001,435,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       995,594,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................     1,016,669,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +15,234,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +21,075,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $1,016,669,000 for resource 
management, an increase of $21,075,000 above the budget request 
and $15,234,000 above the fiscal year 2006 level. Changes to 
the budget request are detailed below.
    Ecological Services.--The Committee recommends $254,091,000 
for ecological services, an increase of $11,467,000 above the 
budget request.
    Changes for endangered species candidate conservation 
programs include increases of $300,000 for Idaho sage grouse 
and $300,000 for the fisher (Martes pennanti) and a general 
program decrease of $500,000.
    There is an increase of $681,000 to address unmet need in 
the consultation program.
    Increases for recovery programs include $146,000 to restore 
the base program, $800,000 for wolf monitoring that is 
transferred from the habitat conservation program, $700,000 for 
wolf monitoring in Idaho, $1,500,000 for Pacific salmon grants 
to be administered through the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation, $500,000 for Florida manatee protection and 
recovery, $150,000 for Northern Aplomado falcon recovery 
efforts through the Peregrine Fund, $500,000 for Southern sea 
otter recovery, and $495,000 for grizzly bear conservation that 
is moved from the habitat conservation program.
    For the Partners for Fish and Wildlife program, there are 
decreases $495,000 for grizzly bear conservation and $800,000 
for wolf monitoring that have been moved to the recovery 
program and increases of $1,400,000 for the Washington regional 
fisheries enhancement groups, $500,000 for the environmental 
data quality and access project with the Washington State 
Department of Fish and Wildlife (salmon recovery), $180,000 for 
technical assistance at the New Jersey Meadowlands; $750,000 
for restoration in the Tunkhannock, Bentley, and Bowman's Creek 
watersheds in Pennsylvania, $500,000 for Georgia streambank 
restoration, $500,000 for nutria eradication at the Blackwater 
NWR, MD, and $1,500,000 to continue the study of Colorado River 
flow and aquatic habitats from Longhorn Dam to Matagorda Bay.
    In project planning, increases include $270,000 to restore 
the FERC review/relicensing program, $550,000 for the Middle 
Rio Grande Bosque initiative, $100,000 to continue operations 
at the Cedar City, UT ecological services office, and $140,000 
to restore the base program.
    In coastal programs there are increases of $500,000 for 
Coastal Barrier Resource System map digitization and $300,000 
to restore funding for the Tampa and Florida panhandle field 
offices.
    Refuges and Wildlife.--The Committee recommends 
$486,572,000 for refuges and wildlife, an increase of 
$6,213,000 above the budget request.
    In refuge operations, there is a net increase of 
$4,444,000; which includes a decrease of $4,278,000 for the 
departmental challenge cost share program and increases of 
$622,000 to restore funds associated with the proposed 
``management savings'' reduction, $3,500,000 for refuge 
operating needs/staffing shortfalls, $1,500,000 to continue the 
Spartina grass control program at the Willapa NWR, WA, 
$1,000,000 to continue cooperative projects with friends groups 
on invasive species control, $1,000,000 to restore the visitor 
facility enhancement program, and $1,100,000 to restore the 
refuge law enforcement program.
    In refuge maintenance, there is an increase of $2,500,000.
    In migratory bird management, there is a decrease of 
$955,000 for the joint ventures program.
    In law enforcement operations, there are increases of 
$124,000 to restore the operations base program and $100,000 to 
restore the maintenance base program.
    Fisheries.--The Committee recommends $121,359,000 for 
fisheries, an increase of $6,747,000 above the budget request. 
For fish and wildlife management, increases include $1,177,000 
to restore funds associated with the proposed general 
reduction, $75,000 to restore the aquatic nuisance species 
program, $500,000 to restore the Great Lakes fish and wildlife 
restoration program, $1,500,000 for Washington State salmon 
mass marking of hatchery fish, $400,000 for Washington salmon 
enhancement activities to be divided equally between the Hood 
Canal Salmon Enhancement Group and Long Live the Kings, 
$250,000 for the Regional Mark Processing Center, $660,000 for 
the Potomac River Snakehead Management Plan, and $185,000 for 
the South River, MD brown bullhead cancer study. There is also 
an increase of $2,000,000 to restore the marine mammals 
program.
    General Administration.--The Committee recommends 
$154,647,000 for general administration, a net decrease of 
$3,352,000 below the budget request. For the National 
Conservation Training Center, there is an increase of $804,000 
to restore base funding and a decrease of $1,800,000 for 
performance training. For the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation, there is a decrease of $2,656,000. In the 
international affairs program there is an increase of $300,000 
for the wildlife without borders program.
    Bill Language.--The Committee recommends continuing bill 
language earmarking funding for the endangered species listing 
program. A total of $17,759,000, as requested, is earmarked for 
listing, of which $12,581,000 is earmarked for critical habitat 
designation.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Department reported to the Committee that 100 
percent of non-pay related fixed costs were funded in the 
budget request; however, no fixed cost increases were requested 
for facilities owned by the Service, such as those at National 
Wildlife Refuges and National Fish Hatcheries. This practice of 
excluding fixed cost funding for Service-owned buildings has 
exacerbated the staffing situation in the Service, and 600 
positions have been lost over the past 2 years. The Service 
should budget for all facility fixed cost increases and not 
just for fixed costs increases for leased space in GSA owned 
buildings. The Department should fully support the Service in 
this effort.
    2. The Service reported to the Committee that it spent 
$708,000 on competitive sourcing efforts in the first half of 
fiscal year 2006 and that it will not exceed the $980,000 
budgeted for these studies for the entire fiscal year. The 
Committee cautions the Service that there is a statutory 
limitation on how much can be spent for competitive sourcing 
studies by the Department of the Interior and that limitation 
applies to the full cost for competitive sourcing, including 
``developing, implementing, supporting, managing, monitoring, 
and reporting on competitive sourcing, including personnel, 
consultant, travel, and training costs associated with program 
management.''
    3. Funds provided for specific programs, such as invasive 
species control, and in specific accounts, such as endangered 
species recovery, should not be diverted to address operational 
funding deficiencies or realigned to other budget line items, 
even if the realignment is less than the reprogramming 
threshold, unless the Committee is notified in advance and 
approves such realignment.
    4. The Service proposed administrative reductions in many 
programs using an activity based costing methodology. The 
Committee notes that activity based costing is used throughout 
the Department of the Interior but no other bureau used this 
system to impose arbitrary reductions to programs and neither 
should the Service in the future. The Committee has restored 
many of the proposed reductions and expects the Service to 
achieve savings, to be used to offset the others, by 
establishing Service Support Centers in the regions and 
eliminating unnecessary rental space as explained in the next 
two items.
    5. The Service should pursue the establishment of Service 
Support Centers to achieve administrative efficiencies; similar 
to the arrangement between Region 1 in Portland, OR and the 
California/Nevada Operations Office. By consolidating 
personnel, contracting and other administrative functions in 
certain Regions, the Service should be able to halt or slow the 
loss of FTEs in the field. The Service should report to the 
Committee by December 31, 2006, with a plan for instituting 
Service Support Centers, including the expected costs and 
savings over time.
    6. Also, to achieve administrative savings, the Service 
should strictly enforce standard space requirements for all 
employees and eliminate excess rental space.
    7. Staffing for ecological services has undergone 
considerable downsizing over the past 2 years; whereas the 
demand for those programs continues to increase. The Service 
should examine using other Service program resources to help 
address the backlog of consultation and recovery activities and 
should work with the States to direct a portion of the State 
Wildlife Grant funds to address candidate conservation 
requirements.
    8. Funds provided for wolf monitoring in Idaho include the 
$400,000 in the budget request and an additional $700,000 
recommended by the Committee. The total of $1,100,000 includes 
$715,000 for the Idaho Office of Species Conservation and 
$385,000 for the Nez Perce Tribe.
    9. The Peregrine Fund should be funded at $550,000 in 
fiscal year 2007, which includes $150,000 for Northern Aplomado 
Falcon recovery activities.
    10. Funds for the Klamath River Basin Restoration Program 
should be used for restoration efforts and should not be used 
for the Klamath River Basin Fisheries Task Force or for the 
Klamath Fisheries Management Council unless these two Federal 
Advisory Committees are reauthorized. Administrative costs 
should be minimized to the greatest extent possible.
    11. Increased funding recommended for National Wildlife 
Refuge operating needs should be used to pay critical energy 
and other cost increases and to fill the most critical staffing 
vacancies.
    12. Funds provided for the ongoing Willapa NWR Spartina 
eradication program include $300,000 for eradicating Spartina 
in Grays Harbor County, WA.
    13. The Committee is aware of the Fergus Falls Wetlands 
Management District's Prairie Wetland Learning Center's 
innovative environmental education program. Programs such as 
these are a critical component in providing students with the 
tools they need to become informed and enthusiastic about the 
future of America's wildlife resources.
    14. The Service should work with the Boys and Girls Clubs 
of America to encourage participation in activities at National 
Wildlife Refuges and National Fish Hatcheries. Coordination 
with the Boys and Girls Clubs and other youth organizations 
will be mutually beneficial to the youth who participate and 
the Service and should ultimately increase public awareness and 
support for Service programs.
    15. The Committee understands that the Service is 
considering further ``complexing'' of National Wildlife Refuges 
as a result of declining staff resources. Currently 188 of the 
545 NWRs are unmanned and there are 116 refuge complexes, in 
which staff service 2 or more refuges. The Committee is 
concerned that there may already be too many refuge complexes 
and expects the Service to consult with the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations prior to instituting any new NWR 
complexes.
    16. No program increase is provided for joint venture 
programs. The Committee will consider funding increases after 
completion and review of the program assessment being conducted 
by the Service.
    17. 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. The fiscal year 2008 budget justification should 
include an update on the Service's efforts in this area. 
Additional reimbursements received may be used to fill critical 
staffing vacancies in the fisheries program.
    18. The Committee continues to expect the Service to 
address inequities in field station funding in the fisheries 
program when allocating base budget increases. The Service 
should consider reimbursable funding; incorporate the results 
of the workforce planning effort; and maintain salary and 
benefit costs, as a percent of total budget, at the same levels 
for each field station.
    19. The Committee continues to believe that the Service's 
science initiative needs to be closely coordinated with, and 
jointly funded by, the U.S. Geological Survey.
    20. West Nile virus remains a serious health threat. 
Diagnoses of and fatalities from the virus have increased 
nationwide, with a high concentration of human illness and 
fatality occurring in California, and the Centers for Disease 
Control predict further increases. The Service should address 
vector control in California and other highly susceptible areas 
by managing wetlands to minimize mosquito production and should 
focus on water control infrastructure and operations and 
maintenance activities that optimize the management of 
wetlands.
    21. Funding provided in 2007 for Avian Influenza, in 
addition to monitoring and testing of birds in Alaska, should 
be used for vector control efforts in other areas. The Service 
should keep the Committee advised, through periodic briefings, 
on its efforts to halt the spread of Avian Influenza.

                              CONSTRUCTION
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $75,216,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        19,722,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        39,756,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -35,460,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +20,034,000
    The Committee recommends $39,756,000 for construction, a 
decrease of $35,460,000 below the fiscal year 2006 level and an 
increase of $20,034,000 above the budget request.
    The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
funds:

                                             [Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Budget      Committee
                  Project                            Description            request   recommendation  Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allegheny NFH, PA.........................  Raceway Restoration &                  0        $1,500        $1,500
                                             Covering [cc].
Wichita Mountains WR, OK..................  Lake Rush Dam Rehabilitation        $375           375             0
                                             [cc].
National Elk Refuge, WY...................  Old Timbers Lake Dam                 545           545             0
                                             Rehabilitation--Phase II [d
//                                             cc].
Leavenworth NFH, WY.......................  Nada Dam, Upper Snow Dam &           500           500             0
                                             Lower Snow Dam--Phase II
                                             [cc].
Jackson NFH, WY...........................  Seismic Rehabilitation of Two      3,499         3,499             0
                                             Buildings--Phase III [ic].
Office of Aircraft Services (Migratory      Replacement of Survey                500         1,000           500
 Bird Surveys).                              Aircraft--Phase II.
Jordan River NFH, MI......................  Replace Effluent Settling            800           800             0
                                             System.
Klamath Basin NWR Complex, CA.............  Water Supply & Management--        1,735         1,735             0
                                             Phase VI.
Midway Atoll NWR..........................  Fuel Farm Replacement [cc]...          0         2,500         2,500
Neosho NFH, MO............................  Visitor Center [c]...........          0         2,534         2,534
Northwest Power Planning Area.............  Fish Screens, etc............          0         4,000         4,000
Servicewide...............................  Bridge Safety Inspections....        570           570             0
Servicewide...............................  Dam Safety Programs &                717           717             0
                                             Inspections.
Servicewide...............................  Visitor Contact Facilities         1,000        10,000         9,000
                                             and Facility Enhancements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal, Line Item Construction......  .............................     10,241        30,275        20,034
================================================================================================================
Nationwide Engineering Services:
    Cost Allocation Methodology...........  .............................      2,456         2,456             0
    Environmental Compliance..............  .............................      1,000         1,000             0
    Other, non-project specific Nationwide  .............................      5,795         5,795             0
     Engineering Services.
    Seismic Safety Program................  .............................        100           100             0
    Waste Prevention, Recycling,            .............................        130           130             0
     Environmental Management.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Subtotal, Nationwide Engineering        .............................      9,481         9,481             0
     Services.
================================================================================================================
        Total.............................  .............................    $19,722       $39,756       $20,034
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Service should use a standardized design approach 
for all visitor center construction and should request funds 
for the highest priority projects. The National Wildlife Refuge 
visitor center priority construction list should be updated to 
remove completed projects; a similar list should be developed 
for National Fish Hatchery visitor centers; and the two lists 
should be integrated so that construction priorities are 
clearly identified.
    2. Funds for ongoing construction projects and for projects 
not yet started that were transferred to respond to hurricanes 
and other emergencies must be repaid using a portion of the 
$162,400,000 provided in the two hurricane supplemental 
appropriations for the Service.

                            LAND ACQUISITION
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $27,990,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        27,079,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        19,751,000
Comparison:
  Appropriation, 2006.................................        -8,239,000
  Budget estimate, 2007...............................        -7,328,000
    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $19,751,000 
for land acquisition, a decrease of $8,239,000 below the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level, and a decrease of $7,328,000 below the 
budget estimate.
    The following table shows the Committee's recommendations:
                          Project                            Amount 
Cape May NWR, NJ......................................        $1,000,000
Eastern Shore NWR, VA.................................         2,300,000
Great Swamp NWR, NJ...................................         1,000,000
Highlands Conservation Act, CT/NY/NJ/PA...............         1,000,000
Rachel Carson NWR, ME.................................           500,000
Silvio Conte NFWR, CT/MA (Johnson Tract)..............         3,000,000
                                                       -----------------
    Subtotal..........................................         8,800,000
Acquisition Management................................         7,171,000
CAM...................................................         1,802,000
Inholdings............................................           478,000
Emergencies & Hardships...............................         1,500,000
                                                       -----------------
        Total.........................................       $19,751,000
                      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, and 
candidate species under the Endangered Species Act and 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, 2006...........................       $21,667,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        24,400,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        15,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        -6,667,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        -9,400,000
    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the landowner 
incentive program, a decrease of $6,667,000 below the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level and $9,400,000 below the budget 
request.

                       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, and candidate species, and other at 
risk species.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................         7,277,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         9,400,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         7,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          -277,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        -2,400,000
    The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for private stewardship 
grants, a decrease of $277,000 below the fiscal year 2006 level 
and $2,400,000 below the budget request.

            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, 2006...........................       $80,001,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        80,001,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        80,507,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +506,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................          +506,000
    The Committee recommends $80,507,000 for the cooperative 
endangered species conservation fund, an increase of $506,000 
above both the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and the budget 
request. Changes to the budget request include an increase of 
$5,573,000 for habitat conservation plan land acquisition and a 
decrease of $5,067,000 for the Nez Perce/Snake River water 
rights settlement that has been funded under the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs.
    Bill Language.--Bill language is recommended deriving only 
the species recovery land acquisition and HCP land acquisition 
portions 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.
    The Interior and Environment bill portion of the funding 
for fiscal year 2007 associated with the Nez Perce Settlement 
is included in full in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Indian 
Land and Water Claim Settlements and Miscellaneous Payments to 
Indians appropriation account.

                     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 $20,702,000 in 
fiscal year 2007 with $14,202,000 derived from this 
appropriation and $6,500,000 from net refuge receipts estimated 
to be collected in fiscal year 2006.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $14,202,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        10,811,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        14,202,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        +3,391,000
    The Committee recommends $14,202,000 for the National 
wildlife refuge fund, which is equal to the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level and an increase of $3,391,000 above the budget 
request.

               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, 2006...........................       $39,412,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        41,646,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        36,646,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        -2,766,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        -5,000,000
    The Committee recommends $36,646,000 for the North American 
wetlands conservation fund, a decrease of $2,766,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 level and $5,000,000 below the budget request. 
Decreases to the budget request include $4,800,000 for wetlands 
conservation grants and $200,000 for program administration.
    Funds for this program are not derived from the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund as proposed by the 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, 2006...........................        $3,941,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................                 0
Recommended, 2007.....................................         4,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................           +59,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        +4,000,000
    The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for the neotropical 
migratory bird conservation program, an increase of $59,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 level and $4,000,000 above the 
budget request. The Administration proposed $3,960,000 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 
notes that the Secretary of the Interior recently named the 
members of the advisory committee that will assist with program 
implementation. The Committee recommends that the Service 
transfer administrative responsibility for neotropical 
migratory bird conservation to the international affairs 
program. The international program has proven experience in 
effectively coordinating with the countries outside the U.S. 
that are the focus of a large part of the neotropical migratory 
bird program. Also, the Committee believes that project 
oversight will be better accomplished through the international 
program, which currently oversees projects in other countries 
through the wildlife without borders program and the 
multinational species conservation program.

                MULTINATIONAL SPECIES CONSERVATION FUND

    This account combines funding for programs under the former 
rewards and operations (African elephant) account, the former 
rhinoceros and tiger conservation account, the Asian elephant 
conservation program, and the great ape conservation program.
    The African Elephant Act of 1988 established a fund for 
assisting nations and organizations involved with conservation 
of African elephants. The Service provides grants to African 
Nations and to qualified organizations and individuals to 
protect and manage critical populations of these elephants.
    The Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994 
authorized programs to enhance compliance with the Convention 
on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and U.S. 
or foreign laws prohibiting the taking or trade of rhinoceros, 
tigers, or their habitat.
    The Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997 authorized a 
grant program, similar to the African elephant program, to 
enable cooperators from regional and range country agencies and 
organizations to address Asian elephant conservation problems. 
The world's surviving populations of wild Asian elephants are 
found in 13 south and southeastern Asian countries.
    The Great Ape Conservation Act of 2000 authorized grants to 
foreign governments, the CITES secretariat, and non-
governmental organizations for the conservation of great apes.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $6,404,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         8,217,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         6,057,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          -347,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        -2,160,000
    The Committee recommends $6,057,000 for the multinational 
species conservation fund, a decrease of $347,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $2,160,000 below the budget 
request. Changes to the budget request include a decrease of 
$3,960,000 for neotropical migratory birds (which is funded in 
a separate account) and increases of $300,000 for African 
elephant conservation, $300,000 for Asian elephant 
conservation, $500,000 for rhinoceros and tiger conservation, 
$300,000 for great ape conservation, and $400,000 for marine 
turtle 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 implement wildlife management and habitat 
restoration for the most critical wildlife needs in each State. 
States submitted comprehensive wildlife conservation plans in 
2005. States are required to provide at least a 50 percent cost 
share for implementation grants and a 25 percent cost share for 
planning grants. Beginning in fiscal year 2006, the vast 
majority of these funds should be used to implement the State 
plans.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $67,492,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        74,666,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        50,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -17,492,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       -24,666,000
    The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for State and tribal 
wildlife grants, a decrease of $17,492,000 below the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level and $24,666,000 below the budget 
request. Within the amount provided, $5,000,000 is for 
competitively awarded grants to Indian tribes.
    Bill Language.--Bill language is continued specifying that 
each State or eligible entity has two years to enter into 
specific grant agreements. If fiscal year 2007 funds remain 
unobligated at the end of fiscal year 2008, the unobligated 
funds will be reapportioned to all States and eligible 
entities, together with any new appropriations provided in 
fiscal year 2009. Bill language also is included providing 
direction on redistributing funds for States with disapproved 
plans. Language is not included earmarking $5,000,000 for a 
competitive grants program for the States. The Committee 
endorses this approach but is unable to provide the additional 
funding for fiscal year 2007.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Service should ensure that grant funds are used for 
species of greatest conservation need and, specifically, for 
habitats and actions identified in the approved plans.
    2. For wildlife conservation plans to be successful, the 
implementing officials need to ``reach out'' to the Federal, 
State, county, and local government, and private landowners 
within the State or Territory to ensure that habitat projects 
are consistently planned and implemented regardless of land 
ownership and to ensure that funds are leveraged to the maximum 
extent possible. This communication needs to occur at the 
grassroots level and not be limited to headquarters or regional 
coordination. For example, conservation actions included in 
approved plans that involve Federal lands should be coordinated 
with the Federal officials responsible for specific activities 
in the field and should be focused on important wildlife 
habitat. Wildlife agency staff and conservation partners should 
meet regularly to evaluate progress. The Committee recommends 
the use of a facilitator to ensure that meetings achieve 
results. This could be achieved through facilitation training 
of wildlife agency staff in the State or Territory.
    3. The Service should develop guidance for the States and 
Territories to facilitate implementation of approved plans and 
should require regular performance reporting to measure the 
success of plan implementation.
    4. Cooperative projects that involve two or more States 
should be encouraged when habitat crosses State lines.
    5. The Service should encourage each State to develop a 
standardized mapping system so that States are documenting and 
measuring the same things in the same ways and comparisons 
across States are meaningful.
    6. The results of State wildlife projects (what works and 
what doesn't) should be shared so that successful projects in 
one State can be replicated in other States and unsuccessful 
approaches in one State are not repeated in other States.
    7. States should update their plans as needed and not 
necessarily on a fixed schedule.
    8. Defenders of Wildlife conducted an independent 
assessment of most of the plans submitted and identified 
different strengths in different elements for many States. The 
assessment also identified 12 exemplary plans. The assessment 
should be useful to States as they continue to refine their 
plans.
    9. The Service should approve plan revisions to ensure that 
the same standards continue to be applied across all States.

                         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 390 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, 2006...........................    $1,718,940,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................     1,742,317,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................     1,754,317,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +35,377,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +12,000,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $1,754,317,000 for operation of 
the National Park System, an increase of $35,377,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $12,000,000 above the 
request. The Committee has appropriated an additional 
$12,000,000 for base increases above the request as well as 
denied most of the programmatic increases in the budget in 
order to provide a total of $20,000,000 for park base 
increases. The additional funds should be allocated in the 
following manner; $15,000,000 for across the board increases to 
all parks and $5,000,000 for critical needs.
    The Committee made this difficult choice despite the fact 
that many of the programmatic increases had merit. 
Unfortunately, because of inadequate budget requests, the parks 
have had to absorb $61,000,000 over the last six years in 
mandatory pay costs. This figure is exclusive of the other cost 
impacts sited by GAO including unfunded retirement and health 
benefit increases, and mandates for homeland security and 
information technology security. Despite the additional 
$300,000,000 provided by this Committee for park operations 
above the budget requests since 2001, along with revenue from 
the recreational fee program, the cumulative effect of these 
cuts has resulted in a reduction in visitor services. The park 
base must remain a priority above all other needs until this 
situation is resolved.
    Park Base Increase.--The Committee has provided $20,000,000 
for park base increases. This is in additiion to the 
$21,000,000 in the budget for pay and fixed cost increases.
    Resource Stewardship.--The Committee recommends 
$358,696,000 for resource stewardship, a decrease of $3,751,000 
below the request and $6,302,000 above the enacted level. 
Included in this amount are increases of $651,000 for air tour 
management plans and $1,000,000 to complete the vital signs 
inventory and monitoring networks. The Committee accepts the 
following reductions in the budget: $222,000 for support of 
Mammoth Cave Science center and $296,000 for vanishing 
treasures. Also included is $4,644,000 for uncontrollable 
expenses.
    Visitor Services.--The Committee recommends $343,862,000 
for visitor services, a decrease of $952,000 below the request 
and $2,842,000 below enacted. Included in this amount are 
increases of $750,000 for FLETC training and $900,000 to 
improve concessions contracting oversight. The Committee 
reluctantly accepts the reduction of $1,600,000 related to 
future film revenue. The Committee strongly urges the 
Department to avoid these types of reductions in the future. 
There is a reduction in fixed costs of $2,892,000 due to 
realignment of funds.
    Maintenance.--The Committee recommends $599,800,000 for 
maintenance, a decrease of $2,000,000 from the request and an 
increase of $6,726,000 above enacted. Included in this amount 
is an increase to cyclic maintenance of $8,000,000. The 
Committee reluctantly accepts the $10,000,000 reduction to the 
repair and rehabilitation program. The Committee would have 
assuredly restored this cut if it were not for the tight fiscal 
times and emphasis on park base increases. The Committee 
cautions the Department about recommending a further cut to 
this program in the fiscal year 2008 budget. It will be 
restored: taking funds from Departmental Management. Also 
included is $8,726,000 for uncontrollable costs.
    Within the amount provided for maintenance, there is 
$200,000 for continued landscape work at Gettysburg NMP, 
$428,000 for work at Amistad NRA, $300,000 for rehabilitation 
work along the GW Parkway, $330,000 to complete a trail project 
at Saratoga NB, $295,000 for architectural work at Ford's 
Theatre, $250,000 for a pipe replacement at Fort Necessity NB 
and $200,000 for boundary survey work at Indiana Dunes NL. The 
Committee understands that the Service plans to fund the 
following projects in fiscal year 2007: $600,000 in projects at 
San Juan NHS and $500,000 in projects at Indiana Dunes NL.
    Park Support.--The Committee recommends $297,880,000 for 
park support, a decrease of $310,000 below the request for 
partnership program oversight. These funds have been provided 
in the construction account. This amount is also $273,000 above 
the enacted level. Included in this amount is an increase of 
$120,000 for Roosevelt-Campobello International Park. The 
Committee accepts the following decreases: $2,463,000 for the 
Lewis and Clark cost share program, $719,0000 for the Lewis and 
Clark traveling exhibition, $33,000 for Beringia support, 
$1,423,000 for service-wide training, $247,000 for wild and 
scenic river partnerships and $1,762,000 for non-recurring IT 
funding. Also included is $6,800,000 for uncontrollable costs. 
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 
$134,079,000 for external administrative costs, a decrease of 
$987,000 below the request and $5,443,000 above the enacted 
level. Included in this amount is an increase of $1,644,000 for 
working capital fund changes. Also included is $3,799,000 for 
uncontrollable expenses.
    South Florida Initiative.--The Committee continues to 
support the restoration of the Everglades and the protection 
and preservation of the national parks and national wildlife 
refuges located in South Florida. Since this initiative began 
over a decade ago, the Committee has provided over $1 billion 
in funding to the Department of the Interior and its bureaus 
for restoration projects and activities. Restoration programs 
funded by the Committee include land acquisition for Federal 
and State areas, water quality improvements--including 
acquisition of lands for Storm Water Treatment Area 1 East--
science, the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, 
Modified Water Deliveries, removal of invasive exotics and 
other habitat restoration projects, and the Department's 
participation in implementing the Comprehensive Everglades 
Restoration Plan.
    The Committee appreciates the progress that has been made 
to restore the Everglades. The intergovernmental restoration 
effort is the largest of its kind ever undertaken and there are 
significant challenges in its implementation. The Committee 
notes that the Congress provided that the Department of the 
Interior shall have an enhanced role in implementing the 
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP). This is based 
on the fact that the primary federal interest in this plan is 
the restoration of the federally-managed Everglades. The 
Committee appreciates the efforts the State of Florida has made 
to provide up-front funding to move forward portions of a 
number of the key projects that were authorized in the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2000. The Committee has provided 
Federal funding to acquire lands in many of the project areas 
that are the subject of the State's Acceler8 initiative. These 
projects include, among others, the Everglades Agricultural 
Area storage reservoir, Picayune Strand restoration (Southern 
Golden Gates Estates), and the C-43 west reservoir (Berry 
Groves). The Committee urges the Department of the Interior to 
be an active participant in this process to ensure that the 
projects will achieve the necessary restoration goals.
    The Committee recognizes that one of the most significant 
challenges facing the intergovernmental restoration effort is 
realizing water quality that is protective of the Everglades 
environment. The State of Florida is to be commended for its 
efforts to construct and operate nearly 41,000 acres of storm 
water treatment areas (STAs) that are removing nutrients from 
the waters discharged from the Everglades Agricultural Area 
into the Everglades, including Loxahatchee National Wildlife 
Refuge and Everglades National Park. Further the State has 
implemented best management practices which have exceeded 
expectations in terms of removing phosphorus at its source. The 
Committee also understands that the State is expanding the STAs 
by 18,000 acres and implementing additional work that will take 
additional time to complete. The Committee is encouraged that 
additional work is underway.
    Despite this progress, the Committee remains deeply 
concerned that more work needs to be done to achieve the 
necessary improvements in water quality. The Committee's views 
are consistent with those of the Departments of the Interior, 
Army and Justice, and the Environmental Protection Agency, 
which together jointly submitted a report to the Congress, as 
required by the Committee, noting that the State of Florida has 
not fully achieved all of its obligations in the consent decree 
in United States v. South Florida Water Management District. 
The joint federal report notes that the State has not fully met 
its requirements to reduce phosphorus loads to A.R.M. 
Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge; that the interim levels 
for total phosphorus concentration at the refuge have been 
exceeded once or more each year since the interim levels went 
into effect; and that more work is needed.
    The State's own reports indicate that additional work is 
necessary to realize discharges that are protective of the 
Everglades. For example, the 2006 South Florida Environmental 
Report, which is prepared by the South Florida Water Management 
District, indicates that several storm water treatment areas 
(STAs) are experiencing performance problems. Specifically, the 
STA-1W average discharge for the last 12 months was 98 parts 
per billion (ppb). STA-1W discharges directly into Loxahatchee 
National Wildlife Refuge, and this level of discharge, as 
confirmed by the Secretary of the Interior during the 
Committee's hearings, will cause an imbalance of the flora and 
fauna of the Everglades. Additionally, the State's report noted 
that STA-5, which discharges into the state-managed Everglades, 
achieved an average discharge of 81 ppb during the last 12 
months. These excessive discharges, if continued, will not 
allow restoration to occur and are inconsistent with the 
requirements of the consent decree, which has as a primary goal 
the restoration and maintenance of water quality that is 
protective of the Everglades.
    Most troubling to the Committee is the fact that U.S. 
District Court Judge Federico Moreno agrees that the State has 
violated the consent decree. His June 1, 2005 Order finds that 
the State is in violation of the interim levels for total 
phosphorus concentration at the refuge. Judge Moreno's Order 
requests that a list of specific acts by specific dates 
detailing what remedial measures will be undertaken to achieve 
the requirements of the decree be provided. The media have 
reported that the State and Federal governments are considering 
a proposal that would terminate the consent decree and 
substitute instead State law mechanisms as the primary 
enforcement tool to achieve water quality improvements. The 
Committee reminds the Department of its long-standing 
opposition to any changes that would weaken the consent decree, 
which was detailed in a July 2005 letter from the Committee to 
the President. After careful review of this matter, and based 
upon information supplied as part of the Committee's hearing 
process by the Department of the Interior and the Environmental 
Protection Agency, the Committee remains opposed to efforts to 
terminate the consent decree before its requirements have been 
met. Without clean water, the Everglades will be irretrievably 
altered and its unique habitat will be degraded. This will 
further frustrate Everglades restoration efforts now underway 
and potentially put at risk the federal taxpayer resources that 
are being expended for the Everglades restoration effort.
    For all of these reasons, the Committee has included bill 
language this year that will make the funds to implement the 
Modified Water Deliveries Project unavailable for expenditure 
unless funds requested in the fiscal year 2007 budget for the 
Army Corps of Engineers for Everglades Restoration are fully 
appropriated and they will be unavailable should the consent 
decree be terminated before its requirements, including the 10 
parts per billion numeric phosphorus criterion, have been 
achieved. The Committee recognizes that the water quality 
improvements may take more time to achieve than December 31, 
2006 deadline; however the appropriate response to Judge 
Moreno's June 1, 2005 Order is not to terminate the decree, but 
rather to work harder to achieve the decree's requirements. In 
the interim, the Committee expects that the annual report, 
required by P.L. 108-108 and prepared jointly by the 
Departments of the Interior, Justice, and Army and the 
Environmental Protection Agency, summarizing the status of the 
water entering A.R.M. Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge and 
Everglades National Park will be submitted on-time this year. 
Additionally, the Committee expects that prior directives 
requiring the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to provide the 
Committee with the refuge's annual and quarterly reports 
summarizing the implementation of the additional monitoring and 
modeling at the refuge will continue for the next fiscal year.
    The Committee also directs that the Department submit again 
a report by December 31, 2006 describing the scientific 
research projects to be funded in the National Park Service and 
the U.S. Geological Survey with the fiscal year 2007 
appropriations. The report should provide details for each 
research project, including how each research project is 
consistent with the Department's Science Plan, as well as how 
the project is filling gaps in scientific information and 
supporting the decisions that need to be made.
    Other.--The Committee continues to support the decision by 
Ozark National Scenic Riverways (ONSR) to retain the carpentry 
and maintenance positions at the park. The Committee recognizes 
the urgent needs at ONSR for these skilled personnel. The 
Committee expects that these positions will be retained.
    The Committee recommends a revised approval process for 
National Park Service (NPS) fee projects. In response to 
concerns early in the program's implementation about the types 
of projects being funded, the Department of the Interior and 
the Committee agreed on a detailed review process for NPS 
recreation fee projects. However, since that time, the Service 
has instituted significant review and accountability measures 
to assure that fee dollars are spent on priority needs and are 
being used to address identified performance goals, such as 
reducing the average cost of collection and contributing 
towards improving the condition of park infrastructure assets. 
In addition, Congress passed new legislation extending the 
program and revising the allowable uses of fee dollars. As a 
result, the Committee agrees to a revised, streamlined process, 
as follows: (1) all parks will develop fee revenue 
comprehensive plans that are reviewed and approved at the 
regional and national levels; (2) once a park's comprehensive 
plan is approved by headquarters, the park has discretion to 
re-sequence projects within the approved plan after regional 
review; (3) fee projects for new construction or expanded 
infrastructure improvements costing more than $500,000 will be 
identified annually in the budget justification, and will be 
considered approved if no response is provided by the Committee 
within 60 days; and (4) the budget justification will also 
contain summary information about the programmatic uses of fee 
dollars in the fiscal years covered by the justification.
    Law Enforcement.--This Committee has expressed repeatedly 
its concerns regarding the direction and cost of extraordinary 
security measures taken at the designated Icon parks and 
elsewhere in the Service since 9/11. Many of the measures taken 
to date have provided at best a limited reduction in risk to 
both the resource and the visitor while coming at a very high 
cost in operating and construction funds. The Committee directs 
that all Icon security measures already established and those 
contemplated for the future be reviewed to ensure they strike a 
rational balance among reduction of a clearly defined risk, 
visitor access, and cost. A report on these findings is to be 
submitted to this Committee for review no later than April 15, 
2007.
    Furthermore, the Committee has not been convinced that 
there is a basis to hold law enforcement programs harmless 
above all other NPS operating programs, particularly during 
these times of limited budgets. The ``no net loss'' policy 
imposed on NPS and other bureaus by the Department is a policy 
that forces the Parks to hold harmless the number of law 
enforcement rangers while forcing all other visitor service, 
maintenance, and resources protection functions to deal with 
the absorption of fixed costs and other budgetary limitations. 
The Committee does not believe that a blanket policy leaving no 
room for management discretion is rational and the Committee 
has included bill language that will preclude it. Since 9/11, 
the Administration has imposed nearly $30 million in additional 
costs for anti-terrorism measures without including any funds 
in the budget. In some cases the Committee has appropriated 
funds to the base, but the balance was absorbed along with pay 
and other fixed costs. This situation will not be tolerated in 
the future.
    Bill Language.--Language is included under the Operations 
account which provides that funds may be spent without regard 
to the ``no net loss'' of law enforcement personal policy.
    Valley Forge NHP.--The public has been patient as the NPS 
has worked through its process in regard to management of the 
over-abundance of white-tailed deer at the park. Within 
existing funds, NPS is directed to begin the environmental 
impact statement for deer management. The Committee expects 
that the plan will be funded fully so that it can be completed 
in fiscal year 2008. The Committee further expects that 
implementation of the selected action will begin immediately 
upon signing of the Record of Decision.
    Budget efficiency.--The Committee is aware of steps taken 
at different levels across the Service to accomplish 
administrative streamlining and greater efficiency as budgetary 
resources decline. The Service is strongly encouraged to look 
for further opportunities, including more shared services from 
a common location (whether park or region), to assure continued 
provision of services needed by the parks but also to assure 
appropriate attention to oversight and accountability 
requirements. The traditional arrangement of every park being 
entirely self-sufficient may need to be rethought in light of 
the advances in technology and changes in business practice 
models that exist today, as well as the significant costs 
associated with supporting such a model.
    The Service should work with the Boys and Girls Clubs of 
America to encourage participation in activities at National 
Parks. Coordination with the Boys and Girls Clubs and other 
youth organizations will be mutually beneficial to the youth 
who participate and the public support for Service programs.
    The Committee urges the National Park Service to complete, 
in an efficient and timely manner, the rulemakings described in 
the final rule issued on March 21, 2000 (65 Fed. Reg. 15,077 
(2000)), regarding personal watercraft use within certain units 
of the National Park System for all 21 of the park areas 
specifically identified in the rule.
    The Committee supports public-private partnerships that 
protect the interests of the National Park Service while 
promoting opportunities for the beneficial use of public lands. 
The Committee is aware of a proposal by the First Tee of 
Washington, DC to partner with the National Park Service and to 
provide funding for the construction of an educational and 
recreational facility whose primary purpose will be the 
development of life skills and character-enhancing values in 
the District of Columbia children on approximately 57 acres of 
the National Park Service property at Kenilworth Park South. 
The Committee urges the National Park Service to act promptly 
on this partnership proposal.
    The National Park Service shall consider the feasibility of 
extending a third lane on the southbound land of the George 
Washington Memorial Parkway from its present terminus near Key 
Bridge to Roosevelt Memorial Bridge in Arlington, Virginia, 
and, not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this 
Act, shall submit to Congress a report on the feasibility of 
such extension.

                       UNITED STATES PARK POLICE
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $80,213,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        84,775,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        84,775,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +4,562,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $84,775,000 for the U.S. Park 
Police, an increase of $4,562,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level and the same as the budget request.

                  NATIONAL RECREATION AND PRESERVATION

    The National recreation and preservation appropriation 
provides for outdoor recreation planning, preservation of 
cultural and National heritage resources, technical assistance 
to Federal, State and local agencies, and administration of 
Historic Preservation Fund grants.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $54,156,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        33,261,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        47,161,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        -6,995,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +13,900,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimate by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $47,161,000 for national 
recreation and preservation, an increase of $13,900,000 above 
the request and a reduction of $6,995,000 below the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.
    Recreation Programs.--The Committee recommends $557,000 for 
recreation programs, the same as the budget request and an 
increase of $11,000 above enacted. The increase is for 
uncontrollable expenses.
    Natural Programs.--The Committee recommends $9,437,000 for 
natural programs, the same as the budget request and a decrease 
of $263,000 below the enacted level. The amount includes a 
programmatic decrease of $500,000 for the Rivers and Trails 
program and an increase of $237,000 for uncontrollable 
expenses. Within funds available for partnership wild and 
scenic rivers $75,000 is provided for Westfield Wild and Scenic 
River.
    Cultural Programs.--The Committee recommends $19,694,000 
for cultural programs, the same as the budget request and a 
decrease of $39,000 below the enacted level. The amount 
includes a programmatic decrease of $368,000 for the UGRR 
grants program and an increase of $329,000 for uncontrollable 
expenses. The Committee strongly urges the Service to provide 
whatever additional funds are necessary to complete work on the 
American Revolution Commemoration Act. Within the funds 
provided, $300,000 is provided for Heritage Preservation Inc.
    Chesapeake Bay Gateways Initiative.--The Committee has not 
provided funds for the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Water Trail 
initiative. Since fiscal year 2000, this Committee has provided 
$11,000,000 for this effort. A routine oversight program review 
conducted last year by the House Appropriations Committee's 
Surveys and Investigative staff uncovered serious problems. 
Despite efforts by the Service to deal with these issues, a 
recent Inspector General (IG) report finds continued problems, 
including Service reluctance to terminate relationships with 
grantees who have failed to complete the terms of the grant 
agreement. According to the IG report, of 23 grant projects 
reviewed, 18 had experienced significant delays which ranged 
from nine months to three years. Some of the reasons given for 
the delay in executing grant agreements were, according to the 
IG, unacceptable. The report goes on to document that Service 
personnel acknowledged that the lack of monitoring the grant 
agreements contributed to some project delays. In addition, of 
another 23 grants that were reviewed by the IG, 18 lacked 
adequate reviews of the actual costs incurred by grantees to 
produce the goods and services stipulated in the grant 
agreement; lacked evidence of meeting the match; and, in some 
cases, indicated improper use of grant funds.
    Further, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is 
about to release a report on the program in the summer of 2006. 
To date, GAO is documenting the same concerns about Service 
mismanagement and lack of oversight of the grant program and 
grantee compliance with regulations, lack of transparency of 
the process of becoming eligible for grants, and the 
questionable public benefit of multiple grants awarded to the 
same grant recipients and for the same purpose. There are also 
issues being raised about adequate grantee financial reporting 
and adequate documentation of progress.
    It appears that the Service is having a difficult time 
properly managing the program. It is also apparent that many of 
the grantees have applied over and over for the same or similar 
projects. Given the very tight fiscal constraints on this bill 
and the fact that the parks have had to absorb $61,000,000 over 
six years in pay and other fixed costs, the Committee feels 
that this program should not be funded.
    International Park Affairs.--The Committee recommends 
$1,557,000 for international affairs, the same as the budget 
request and a decrease of $37,000 below the enacted level. The 
amount includes decreases of $34,000 for the office of 
international affairs and $34,000 for the international border 
program. There is an increase of $31,000 for uncontrollable 
expenses.
    Environmental and Compliance Review.--The Committee 
recommends $403,000 for environmental and compliance review, 
the same as the budget request and an increase of $10,000 above 
the enacted level. The increase is for uncontrollable expenses.
    Grant Administration.--The Committee recommends $1,613,000 
for grant administration, the same as the budget request and a 
decrease of $272,000 below the enacted level. The amount 
includes a programmatic decrease of $306,000 for UPARR grant 
administration and a $34,000 increase for uncontrollable 
expenses.
    Heritage Partnership Program.--The Committee recommends 
$13,900,000 for the heritage partnership program, an increase 
of $13,900,000 over the budget request and $599,000 above the 
enacted level. The Committee recommends the following 
distribution of funds:
                          Project                            Amount 
America's Agricultural Heritage Partnership (Silos &            $700,000
Augusta Canal National Heritage Area..................           350,000
Automobile National Heritage Area.....................           450,000
Blue Ridge National Heritage Area.....................           800,000
Cane River National Heritage Area.....................           800,000
Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor........           750,000
Erie Canalway National Corridor.......................           750,000
Essex National Heritage Area..........................           800,000
Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area............           450,000
John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National                  800,000
 Heritage Corridor....................................
Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area..............           500,000
Mississippi Gulf National Heritage Area...............           200,000
National Aviation Heritage Area.......................           250,000
National Coal Heritage Area...........................           200,000
Ohio and Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor........           800,000
Oil Region National Heritage Area.....................           300,000
Quinnebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National                  800,000
 Heritage Corridor....................................
Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area................           800,000
Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage Area........           450,000
Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic                 500,000
 District.............................................
South Carolina National Heritage Corridor.............           800,000
Tennessee Civil War Heritage Area.....................           400,000
Wheeling National Heritage Area.......................           800,000
Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area..................           350,000
                                                       -----------------
    Subtotal, Projects................................        13,800,000
Administration........................................           100,000
                                                       -----------------
        Total.........................................       $13,900,000
                       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 to develop data for planning use.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $72,172,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        71,858,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        58,658,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -13,514,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       -13,200,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following tables:


    The Committee recommends $58,658,000 for historic 
preservation programs, a decrease of $13,200,000 below the 
request and $13,514,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.
    The Committee recommendation provides $35,717,000 for the 
state historic preservation offices, $3,941,000 for tribal 
grants, $15,000,000 for Save America's Treasures grants, 
$3,000,000 for Preserve America grants and $1,000,000 for 
Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) grants. 
While the Committee has been strongly supportive of HBCU 
grants, there have been significant carryover balances over the 
last three years, despite the fact that the Committee reduced 
the private cost share to 30 percent.
    The Committee has rejected the budget proposal to reduce by 
50 percent the Heritage Partnership Program and include it 
along with Save America's Treasures and Preserve America under 
the Historic Preservation Fund. Heritage areas can be found, as 
in previous years, under National Recreation and Preservation.
    The Committee recommends the following allocation for Save 
America's Treasures grants.
 Alexandria Lyceum, VA.................................           $50,000
Alviso Adobe, CA......................................           250,000
Anderson Hall, PA.....................................            50,000
Bellport/Brookhaven, NY...............................            75,000
Benjamin Franklin Memorial, PA........................           200,000
Bennett College for Women, NC.........................            75,000
Bixby House, Barn and Carriage House, PA..............           200,000
Boal Mansion, PA......................................           150,000
Bremerton Public Library, WA..........................           200,000
Brown Mansion, KS.....................................           100,000
Capitol Music Hall, WV................................           250,000
Carnegie Free Public Library, WI......................           200,000
Carnegie Public Library, SC...........................           200,000
Clay County Courthouse, NC............................           200,000
Corinne Depot, UT.....................................            80,000
East Rock Soldiers & Sailors Monument, CT.............           200,000
Elias Church, PA......................................           250,000
Eureka Main Stage, AR.................................           250,000
Gold Bug/Meagher House, CA............................           100,000
Hay House, GA.........................................           100,000
Haywood County Courthouse, NC.........................           100,000
Historic Huntley, VA..................................            75,000
Immigration Station Hospital Building, CA.............           250,000
John Henry Historical Park, WV........................           150,000
Agriculture Reform Movement Building, TN..............           150,000
Lloyd House Gardens, VA...............................            50,000
Lustron House, VA.....................................            75,000
Mason County Courthouse, WA...........................           200,000
Maverick Concert Hall, NY.............................           250,000
Moland House, PA......................................           100,000
Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe Mission, NM...............           100,000
Olmsted Park (pergola), KY............................           150,000
Opera House Theater, TX...............................           200,000
Oroville Historic State Theatre Renovations, CA.......           100,000
Poplar Hill on His Lordship's Kindness, MD............           200,000
Quinn Chapel, IL......................................           100,000
Revitalizing the Hamlet of Annandale, NY..............           250,000
Richard Howe House, OH................................           100,000
St. Joseph's College Theatre, IN......................           200,000
Salisbury House, IA...................................            75,000
Scottish Rite Temple, Bloomington, IL.................           250,000
Seabound Coastline RR Museum, FL......................           150,000
Spencer Ice Plant, WV.................................            50,000
Spring Hill Home, OH..................................           200,000
Stewart Family Home/Quail Hollow, OH..................            20,000
Tarrytown Lighthouse, NY..............................           125,000
Thompson-Neely Grist Mill, PA.........................            50,000
Tom Custer House, NC..................................            75,000
W.A. Young & Son's Foundry, PA........................           200,000
Wesleyan College Building, GA.........................            75,000
William Cullen Bryant Home, MA........................           150,000
Wyandot County, OH....................................           100,000
                                                       -----------------
    Total.............................................        $7,500,000
                              CONSTRUCTION
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $332,858,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       229,269,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       229,934,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................      -102,924,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................          +665,000
    The Committee recommends $229,934,000 for construction, an 
increase of $665,000 above the budget request and a decrease of 
$102,924,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:
  
Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library & Museum, IL.....          $300,000
Acadia National Park, ME (rehab sewage plant).........         2,390,000
Big Bend National Park, TX (treat drinking water).....         2,216,000
Boston National Historical Park, MA (replace barge)...         1,527,000
Carlsbad Caverns National Park, NM (replace sewer              3,690,000
 system)..............................................
Cuyahoga Valley National Park, OH (rehabilitation)....         2,500,000
Death Valley National Park, CA (water system).........         8,754,000
Everglades National Park, FL (modified water).........        13,330,000
Ford's Theatre, DC....................................         1,500,000
Gateway National Recreation Area (Miller Field), NY              620,000
 (restrooms & plan)...................................
Hamilton Grange National Memorial, NY (rehab & move)..         8,493,000
Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, HI (replace cesspools)         4,319,000
Independence National Historical Park, PA (security              843,000
 fence)...............................................
Independence National Historical Park, PA (Deschler-           2,272,000
 Morris House)........................................
Moccasin Bend NAD, TN (streambank erosion)............         2,000,000
Mount Rainier National Park, WA (replace visitor               2,791,000
 center)..............................................
Mount Rainier National Park, WA (rehab Paradise Inn)..         8,084,000
National Mall & Memorial Parks, DC (Ford's Theatre)...         3,114,000
Olympic National Park, WA (Elwha Dam).................        20,010,000
Point Reyes National Seashore, CA (watershed                   2,444,000
 restoration).........................................
Redwood National Park, CA (remove roads)..............         2,255,000
Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site, MA (replace          3,202,000
 dock)................................................
Southwest Pennsylvania Heritage Commission, PA                 2,500,000
 (rehabilitation).....................................
Tuskegee Airmen National Historic Site, AL (Moton              3,388,000
 Airfield)............................................
Tuskegee Airmen National Historic Site, AL (Hangar 2).         4,093,000
USS Arizona Memorial, HI (rehabilitation).............         3,685,000
Valley Forge National Historical Park, PA (Washington          2,348,000
 headquarters)........................................
White House, DC (structural/utility rehab)............         6,298,000
Wind Cave National Park, SD (replace lighting system).         2,965,000
                                                       -----------------
    Subtotal..........................................       121,931,000
Emergency/Unscheduled.................................         2,956,000
Housing...............................................         6,897,000
Equipment replacement.................................        23,617,000
Planning, construction................................        19,649,000
General management plans..............................        13,601,000
Line item construction & maintenance..................       121,931,000
Construction program management.......................        38,360,000
Dam safety............................................         2,623,000
Managed partnership projects..........................           300,000
                                                       -----------------
        Total Construction............................       229,934,000
    Other.--The Committee has included $300,000 to continue 
work on the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum in 
Illinois, $2,500,000 for rehabilitation work at Cuyahoga Valley 
National Park in Ohio, $2,000,000 for streambank erosion work 
at Moccasin Bend NAD in Tennessee, and $2,500,000 for the 
Southwest Pennsylvania Heritage Commission in Pennsylvania.
    The Committee has also included $620,000 for Gateway 
National Recreation Area for comfort stations and an updated 
development plan for Miller Field. In considering alternatives 
for improvements at Miller Field, the Service should focus on 
the most critical and high priority requirements to improve 
conditions at this high-use area. Total costs for improvements 
must be realistic and attainable in the current budget 
environment. The components of the plan will have to be 
implemented in phases, so small increments must necessarily be 
a part of any plan. The Service should also use this planning 
process to pursue partnerships with the leagues and users of 
these recreational areas.
    The Committee is aware of delays in executing a line-item 
project funded in fiscal year 2004 for reconstruction of 
historic guard walls along the Blue Ridge Parkway and that 
these funds remain unobligated In view of the need to complete 
other construction projects underway at the Blue Ridge Parkway, 
and given the higher costs now contemplated for the guard wall 
project, the Service is directed to reprogram these funds, as 
necessary, to complete the construction of the visitor center 
under construction near Asheville, North Carolina.
    The Committee has included $365,000 in the General 
Management Plans account to complete the Manhattan Project 
Plan.
    Bill language.--Bill language on the South Florida 
Restoration project has been modified from current law to 
include a provision making funds contingent on the continuation 
of the consent degree in United States v. South Florida Water 
Management District.

                    LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND

                              (RESCISSION)
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      -$30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       -30,000,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       -30,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends the rescission of $30,000,000 in 
the annual contract authority provided by 16 U.S.C. 46l-10a. 
This authority has not been used in years, and there are no 
plans to use it in fiscal year 2007.

                 LAND ACQUISITION AND STATE ASSISTANCE
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $46,954,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        24,343,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        29,995,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -16,959,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        +5,652,000
    The Committee recommends $29,995,000 for land acquisition 
and State assistance, a decrease of $16,959,000 below the 
enacted level and an increase of $5,652,000 above the request.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:
  
Chickamauga-Chattanooga NMP, TN.......................        $2,000,000
Cuyahoga Valley NP, OH................................           500,000
Flight 93, PA.........................................         5,000,000
Ice Age, WI...........................................         2,000,000
Indiana Dunes NL, IN..................................         1,000,000
Mt. Rainier Carbon Creek River Gateway, WA............         1,500,000
Shenandoah NB, VA.....................................         2,000,000
                                                       -----------------
    Subtotal..........................................        14,000,000
Emergencies & Hardships...............................         3,349,000
Inholdings............................................         2,000,000
Acquisition Management................................         9,021,000
Stateside Administration..............................         1,625,000
                                                       -----------------
        Total.........................................       $29,995,000
    Funds provided for the Flight 93 Memorial are to be used to 
acquire authorized lands at fair market value established 
through the federal appraisal process.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Bill language has been included to allow the transfer of 
$66,000 to the Washington Tennis and Education Foundation for 
recreation and education programs for at-risk school children 
in the District of Columbia.

                    United States Geological Survey

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

                 SURVEYS, INVESTIGATIONS, AND RESEARCH
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $970,645,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       944,760,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       991,447,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +20,802,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +46,687,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $991,447,000 for surveys, 
investigations, and research, an increase of $46,687,000 above 
the budget request and $20,802,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level. The discussion below references changes to the 
budget request.
    Geographic Research, Investigations, and Remote Sensing.--
The Committee recommends $78,614,000 for geographic research 
and remote sensing, $2,000,000 above the budget request and 
$50,659,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The large 
reduction from the enacted is due to the transfer of funds for 
the former cooperative topographic mapping program to the 
Federal geographic data coordination subactivity within the 
enterprise information activity. The Committee agrees with 
Administration efforts to streamline geographic investigations 
and enhance national service; this is better accomplished by 
consolidating geographic funding in the enterprise activity as 
recommended in the request. The change to the request is an 
increase of $2,000,000 for the AmericaView cooperative 
geographic program; this program provides service to many 
States and communities and leverages Federal funding with many 
partners.
    The Committee has fully funded the requested funds, 
$15,950,000, for the Landsat Data Continuity Mission, which 
will place the next generation Landsat sensor in orbit. Long-
term remote sensing data is vital to many aspects of the 
government and private sector and is strongly supported by this 
Committee. This funding will complement the larger commitment 
required by the NASA.
    Geologic Hazards, Resources and Processes.--The Committee 
recommends $241,861,000 for geologic hazards, resources, and 
processes, $24,443,000 above the budget request and $6,575,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The recommendation 
includes the requested increase of $2,000,000 for energy 
resources research activities. Changes from the request for the 
geologic landscape and coastal assessments program include an 
increase of $500,000 to restore partially the Florida shelf 
research effort and $1,000,000 for hurricane science to be 
established in the Survey's Florida lab. This latter effort 
should be included in the future as a part of the multi-hazards 
science initiative.
    The Committee has restored fully the mineral resources 
program, including $18,443,000 for research and assessments and 
$4,500,000 for minerals information. 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 adding billions of 
dollars to the economy. Mineral commodities are essential to 
both national security and infrastructure development. Mineral 
resources research and assessments are a core responsibility of 
the Survey. The Committee does not agree that objective data on 
mineral commodities can be generated in the private sector and 
the Committee importunes the Administration to not propose this 
program elimination again.
    The recommendation includes all requested funds for the new 
multi-hazards demonstration initiative. This includes funding 
in this activity as well as all the other activities within the 
Survey's budget.
    Water Resources Investigations.--The Committee recommends 
$213,791,000 for water resources investigations, $9,744,000 
above the budget request and $2,027,000 above the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level. The recommendation includes the requested 
increase of $2,325,000 for the National streamflow information 
system. The recommendation also restores: (1) the technical 
support activities of the National water-quality assessment to 
the previous funding level (an increase of $940,000 above the 
request); (2) the Hood Canal, WA, water study ($100,000); (3) 
the Upper San Pedro River partnership, AZ ($300,000); (4) 
cooperative water program interpretive studies ($2,000,000); 
and (5) State water research institutes ($6,404,000).
    Biological Research.--The Committee recommends $175,597,000 
for biological research, $3,000,000 above the budget request 
and $723,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The 
recommendation includes the requested increase of $1,000,000 
for the NatureServe program. The recommendation also partially 
restores three requested program reductions; this includes 
$350,000 above the request for the Pacific northwest forest 
program, $300,000 for ivory-billed woodpecker research, and 
$1,000,000 for the national biological information 
infrastructure. The recommendation also includes an increase of 
$200,000 for the science excellence program in cooperation with 
the Fish and Wildlife Service, $150,000 for the anadromous fish 
research lab Connecticut River watershed project, MA, and an 
increase of $1,000,000 for the Great Lakes Science Center 
operations.
    The Committee urges the Survey to try to implement the 
Chesapeake Bay science plan, including the assessment of 
nutrient and sediment reduction strategies in the watershed, 
identifying sediment sources to improve implementation of 
sediment reduction practices, and assessing the causes for fish 
health problems in the Potomac Basin.
    Enterprise Information.--The Committee recommends 
$113,730,000 for enterprise information, $2,500,000 above the 
budget request, and $67,336,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level. The change from the enacted is largely due to 
the transfer of funds from the former cooperative topographic 
mapping program within the mapping, remote sensing and 
geographic investigations activity to the Federal geographic 
data coordination subactivity. The change to the budget request 
includes $500,000 above the request to offset half of the 
operational efficiencies claimed in the request and $2,000,000 
to improve the Nation's geospatial data program and the 
geospatial one-stop (GOS) program by expanding the operational 
architecture of the GOS and integrating additional bureau and 
Federal mapping enterprises in the GOS.
    Science Support.--The Committee recommends $72,382,000 for 
science support, $5,000,000 above the budget request and 
$3,080,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The 
increase above the request is to make up for past fixed costs 
which have had to be absorbed by the Survey.
    Facilities.--The Committee recommends $95,472,000 for 
facilities, as requested, a $690,000 increase to the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level.
    The Mid-Continent Mapping Center (MCMC) in Rolla, Missouri, 
was scheduled to be consolidated into a National Geospatial 
Technical Operations Center (NGTOC) on September 15, 2005. This 
action would close three regional centers in Rolla, Menlo Park, 
and Reston and create the NGTOC in Denver, eliminating the 
jobs, operations, and functions of the MCMC. According to the 
Department of Interior Inspector General, the site selection 
was ``supported by the whole of the record.'' However, the 
Committee has recognized that the Inspector General's finding 
that ``the U.S. Geological Survey failed to effectively and 
transparently demonstrate the entirety of its criteria or 
communicate the magnitude of its rational.''
    The Committee is of the belief that the MCMC located in 
Rolla, Missouri, provides important date for mapping and 
responding to disasters and emergencies. The MCMC located in 
Rolla, Missouri, is critical to assessing threats and 
weaknesses prior to emergencies which can be forecast or 
anticipated. The MCMC in Rolla, Missouri, provides necessary 
overflow capability to keep USGS data available over the 
internet. The MCMC in Rolla, Missouri, provides critical 
support for the construction of the National Map.
    Provided the important purposes the Mid-Continent Mapping 
Center in Rolla, Missouri serves, and the subjective nature of 
the U.S. Geological Survey's decision to close and consolidate 
the work being performed at MCMC, the Committee appropriates 
sufficient funds under to this Act to continue the function, 
activities, operations, and archives Mid-Continent Mapping 
Center (MCMC), located in Rolla, Missouri and prohibits Federal 
funds from being used to carry out the closure and 
consolidation of the Rolla MCMC.

                      Minerals Management Service

    The Minerals Management Service (MMS) is responsible for 
collecting, distributing, accounting and auditing revenues from 
mineral leases on Federal and Indian lands. In fiscal year 
2007, MMS expects to collect and distribute about $14.0 billion 
from active Federal and Indian leases. The MMS also manages the 
offshore energy and mineral resources on the Nation's outer 
continental shelf (OCS). 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. Under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, MMS has new 
responsibilities over Federal offshore renewable energy and 
related uses of America's offshore public lands.

                ROYALTY AND OFFSHORE MINERALS MANAGEMENT
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $167,391,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       156,651,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       157,496,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        -9,895,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................          +845,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $157,496,000 
for royalty and offshore minerals management, an increase of 
$845,000 above the budget request and $9,895,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. In addition, the Committee 
recommends use of $128,730,000 in receipts, which agrees with 
the Administration request to increase receipts by $6,000,000.
    The Committee recommendation provides $7,387,000 for new 
Energy Policy Act of 2005 responsibilities, a reduction of 
$1,000,000 from the request. The reduction is from the leasing 
and environmental program subactivity; it reduces the increased 
funding request for OCS alternate energy use to $4,926,000. 
Other activities are funded at the request, except for the 
following small increases to offset partially fixed cost 
increases: $230,000 for policy and management improvement; 
$663,000 for administrative operations; and $952,000 for 
general support services.
    The Committee is aware that concerns have been raised about 
the MMS methods for collecting royalties for extraction of oil 
and gas from certain federal and Indian lands. The Committee 
believes it is imperative that the Interior Department's 
inspection, audit and enforcement activities result in proper 
revenue collections. Accordingly, the Committee directs the 
Department of the Interior to provide a report to the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations by January 31, 2007. The 
report should include a proposed timetable and estimated costs 
associated with analyzing options for changing regulations for 
federal and Native American natural gas leases, to institute 
more accurate measurement and reporting of natural gas can 
improve the accuracy of gas flow measurements including but not 
limited to: requiring the use of digital meters on all leases 
which are calibrated monthly, checking for pipeline bypasses, 
ensuring condensates are reported, and regular inspection of 
measurements taken at company master meters which can then be 
compared to well-specific meters for accuracy.
    Bill Language.--The Committee has modified bill language 
requested by the Administration to allow three percent of the 
coastal impact assistance funds provided in section 31 of the 
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to be used for necessary 
administrative requirements of the service. The Committee notes 
that it is vital that this program be carefully administered to 
ensure maximum gain to the public and the energy producing 
States. The MMS should include information on activities and 
funding related to the coastal impact program in future budget 
justifications.

                           OIL SPILL RESEARCH
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $6,903,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         6,903,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         6,903,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $6,903,000 as requested 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 the fiscal year 2006 enacted 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 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 are on Federal and Tribal lands. Through its 
Abandoned Mine Land (AML) reclamation 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 endanger public health and safety or prevent the 
beneficial use of land and water resources.

                       REGULATION AND TECHNOLOGY
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $108,810,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       112,109,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       112,109,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +3,299,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The Committee recommends $112,109,000, the budget request, 
for regulation and technology. This is $3,299,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                    ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION FUND
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $185,248,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       185,936,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       185,936,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +688,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:






    The Committee recommends $185,936,000 for the Abandoned 
Mine Reclamation Fund, which is the same as the budget request 
and $688,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. There is 
an additional $100,000 that is estimated to be available in 
2007 from performance board forfeiture receipts. The Committee 
has retained language, as in past years, which limits funding 
for minimum program states to $1,500,000.
    Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA).--The 
Committee wholly supports the inclusion of an extension to the 
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) through 
December 31, 2007 in the recent Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriations. However, a need for a more permanent solution 
is necessary. The Committee encourages the authorizing 
Committees to reach consensus and act on a legislative 
proposal, that would increase the rate at which dangerous 
abandoned sites would be reclaimed and provide a fair and 
reasonable method of compensating the states and other 
governments, which have completed abandoned mine reclamation 
activities. Without new legislative direction this problem and 
associated reclamation costs will continue to grow.
    Abandoned Coal Mine Sites.--The Committee is concerned that 
the known inventory of unfunded environmental (Priority 3) coal 
problems totals $1.8 billion and that Priority 3 problems have 
never been systematically inventoried. Therefore, the Committee 
directs the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 
Enforcement (OSM) to report to the Committee not later than 
December 31, 2006, on the methodology used to determine the 
current cost of the known inventory for unfunded environmental 
coal problems by State with an estimate of the scope and cost 
of doing a systematic inventory that includes the use of 
statistical samples from the various States.
    Bill Language.--The Committee has included language which 
transfers the balance in the fund for the rural abandoned mine 
program (RAMP), which has not been used, to the Federal share 
fund, so the funds could be used in the future for emergencies 
and other Federal obligations.

                        ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

    The Committee has retained the administrative provision 
proposed by the Administration's 2007 fiscal year budget 
request for the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 
Enforcement that allows the transfer of title for computer 
hardware, software and other technical equipment to State and 
Tribal regulatory and reclamation programs.

                        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 1.6 million Native 
Americans through 12 regional offices and 88 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 
56 million acres of land held in trust status. Over 10 million 
of these acres belong to individuals and 46 million acres are 
held in trust for Tribes.

                      OPERATION OF INDIAN PROGRAMS
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................    $1,962,190,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................     1,966,594,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................     1,973,403,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +11,213,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        +6,809,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    The Committee recommends $1,973,403,000 for the operation 
of Indian programs, $6,809,000 above the budget request and 
$11,213,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    The Committee commends the Bureau of Indian Affairs for 
presenting the President's 2007 budget submission in the new 
budget structure. The old budget structure was confusing and 
complex and offered little opportunity to review funding levels 
and assess performance on a programmatic level, the Committee 
is hopeful that the new structure will enable a better working 
relationship between the Bureau and Tribal leaders and 
governments.
    The Committee however, remains concerned about the amount 
of carryover monies in many of the accounts and about 
complaints from Tribes that there was inadequate consultation 
with Tribes and Tribal leaders during preparation of this 
year's budget. The Committee is also concerned that the process 
of making budgetary data available to Tribes is inadequate.
    Therefore, the Committee directs the Bureau to update the 
Committee on how the budget structure is: (1) being received by 
the tribes; (2) aligned programmatically to provide full 
transparency for Tribal priority allocation funding, (3) 
increases accountability for Bureau programs and program 
managers, and (4) clearly delineates funding levels of the 
central and regional offices. The Committee direct that this 
report be received not later than December 31, 2006.
    Tribal Government.--The Committee recommends $401,738,000 
for Tribal Government activities and operations, the same as 
the budget request and $27,049,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level.
    Human Services.--The Committee recommends $139,385,000 for 
human services, to include social services and welfare 
assistance, the same as the budget request and $11,031,000 
below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    The Committee included bill language as proposed by the 
Administration to allow the Secretary to exceed the welfare 
budget cap in cases of designated Federal disasters.
    Trust--Natural Resources Management.--The Committee 
recommends $141,510,000 for natural resources management and 
oversight, $1,000,000 below the budget request and $11,244,000 
below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. An increase of 
$1,000,000 is provided for the Washington timber-fish-wildlife 
program, and should be used for the mass marking of salmon. A 
decrease of $2,000,000 is for Energy Policy Act of 2005 program 
implementation.
    Trust--Real Estate Services.--The Committee recommends 
$151,593,000 for real estate services and oversight, $1,056,000 
below the budget request and $9,751,000 above the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level. The Committee agrees with the requested 
increase for trust services to implement reforms to address the 
probate backlog; however, a reduction of $1,056,000 within the 
requested increase for probate backlog is necessary to restore 
decreases elsewhere in the 2007 budget request.
    Education.--The Committee recommends $652,214,000 for 
education, $13,059,000 above the budget request and $5,784,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The Committee has 
fully restored the proposed reduction of $16,371,000 to the 
Johnson-O'Malley assistance grants. The Committee feels that 
the justification for the reduction, that there are other 
programs in the government that could provide these funds, is 
unfounded because there is no guarantee of a one-for-one 
correlation between the Department of Education grant 
opportunities and what Johnson-O'Malley provides to the Tribes. 
The Committee has also reduced Education--Elementary and 
Secondary Programs by $3,311,000 because this is the amount of 
unused prior year funds available for fiscal year 2007.
    The Committee believes that the United Tribes Technical 
College and Crownpoint Institute are institutions of higher 
learning that provide an educational benefit to Indian country. 
The continued reduction of funding for these institutions is of 
great concern. The Committee urges the Department and the 
Office of Management and Budget to give these colleges full 
consideration in future budget requests and to work with these 
institutions to resolve concerns and disparities over funding 
formulas prior to submission of the fiscal year 2008 budget 
request.
    Public Safety and Justice.--The Committee recommends 
$209,535,000 for public safety and justice, $4,194,000 below 
the budget request and $2,607,000 below the 2006 enacted level.
    The funding provided for law enforcement should be used for 
high priority law enforcement needs in Indian country developed 
in consultation with the Tribes and Tribal leaders including, 
but not limited to, community policing programs and drug 
enforcement. The Bureau should provide the Committee a report 
detailing the use of law enforcement funds not later than 
December 31, 2006.
    Community and Economic Development.--The Committee 
recommends $39,175,000 for community and economic development, 
the same as the budget request and $12,607,000 below the 2006 
enacted level.
    Executive Direction and Administration Services.--The 
Committee recommends $238,253,000, the same as the budget 
request and $6,118,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.

                              CONSTRUCTION
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $271,582,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................      $215,049,000
Recommended 2007......................................       215,799,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -55,783,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................          +750,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $215,799,000 for construction, 
$750,000 above the budget request and $55,783,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    Education.--The Committee recommends $157,441,000 for 
education construction, the same as the budget request and 
$49,346,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    The Committee continues to support Indian school 
construction and repair funding. The Committee understands the 
need to slowdown new construction to allow planning and design 
to catch up with previously appropriated construction funding. 
The Committee does not, however, agree that the Bureau needs to 
reduce funding for new schools to finish ongoing projects. The 
Bureau has experienced large, unobligated carryover balances 
from prior years in the construction account.
    The Committee directs the Bureau to report not later than 
March 1, 2007 on the projected obligation, by project, of the 
existing balance of carryover dollars as discussed during the 
fiscal year 2007 budget review; the time frame for obligation; 
the implementation of new policies and processes on enrollment 
projections and updated education space standards; and the 
modifications that have been made to strengthen existing 
planning and design policies.
    Public Safety and Justice.--The Committee recommends 
$11,611,000 for public safety and justice construction, the 
same as the budget request and $8,000 above the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.
    Resources Management.--The Committee recommends $38,560,000 
for resources management construction, $750,000 above the 
budget request and $6,539,000 below the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level. The funding increase of $750,000 is for upgrades 
and repairs for the Navajo Agriculture Products Industry 
irrigation project. This funding is in addition to the base 
funding provided in the budget for the Navajo Indian Irrigation 
Project.
    Navajo Indian Irrigation Project.--The Committee remains 
concerned about the management of the Navajo Indian Irrigation 
Project (NIIP). Overhead costs of the project have been 
excessive and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) management and 
oversight of the project has been confused and convoluted, with 
no one clearly in charge. As recently as 2004, nearly $2.3 of a 
$12.9 million appropriation was devoted to BIA staff and 
consultants, although the project is actually being constructed 
by the Bureau of Reclamation. Only $9.98 million was 
transferred to Reclamation construction activities. To address 
this unacceptable situation, the Committee directs the 
Secretary to take the following actions:
    1. Limit BIA staffing and other overhead costs from the 
construction appropriation for NIIP to not more than $700,000.
    2. Ensure that the balance of the amount provided for the 
project is made available to the Bureau of Reclamation 
immediately.
    3. Develop a streamlined management structure assigning 
clear responsibility within BIA for NIIP and providing for 
seamless coordination between BIA and the Bureau of 
Reclamation.
    4. Ensure that non-contract and indirect cost surcharges by 
the Bureau of Reclamation to the funds transferred from BIA are 
limited to the minimum amount necessary to support on-going 
construction and rehabilitation of NIIP.
    The Committee further expects that the Secretary will give 
first priority within construction funding, including 
carryover, to correcting construction deficiencies and 
completing rehabilitation of the older blocks of NIIP.
    General Administration.--The Committee recommends 
$2,111,000 for general administration, the same as the budget 
request and $6,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    Construction Management.--The Committee recommends 
$6,076,000 for construction management, the same as the budget 
request and $88,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

 INDIAN LAND AND WATER CLAIM SETTLEMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS PAYMENTS TO 
                                INDIANS

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $34,243,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        33,946,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        39,213,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +4,970,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        +5,267,000
    The Committee recommends $39,213,000 for Indian land and 
water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to Indians, 
$5,267,000 above the budget request and $4,970,000 below the 
2006 enacted level. Funding includes $625,000 for the White 
Earth land settlement, $250,000 for Hoopa-Yurok, $142,000 for 
Pyramid Lake, $7,500,000 for Rocky Boy's, $10,339,000 for the 
Cherokee, Choctaw and Chickasaw settlement, $316,000 for 
Quinault, and $20,041,000 for Nez Perce/Snake River. The 
changes to the budget request reflect the addition of 
$5,067,000 which was requested in the Fish and Wildlife Service 
budget for the Idaho Salmon and Clearwater River Basins Habitat 
Account and $200,000 which was requested in the Bureau of Land 
Management (BLM) budget for mitigation of BLM land transfers 
for the Nez Perce/Snake settlement.

                 INDIAN GUARANTEED LOAN PROGRAM ACCOUNT
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $6,255,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         6,262,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         6,262,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................            +7,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $6,262,000 for the Indian 
guaranteed loan program account, the same as the budget request 
and $7,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    The Committee has retained all administrative provisions 
proposed by the Administration's 2007 fiscal year budget 
request for the Bureau of Indian Affairs including changes to a 
prior administrative provision, limiting the use of funds in 
the executive direction and administrative service account and 
the provision proposed by the Administration that allows the 
use of funds from Indian Student Equalization Program (ISEP) 
for costs associated with student enrollment increases at 
Bureau-funded schools.

                          Departmental Offices


                            Insular Affairs

    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 Mariana 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.

                       ASSISTANCE TO TERRITORIES
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $76,160,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        74,361,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        77,561,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +1,401,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        +3,200,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:



[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $77,561,000 for assistance to 
territories, $3,200,000 above the budget request and an 
increase of $1,401,000 above the fiscal year 2006 level.
    Territorial Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$26,961,000 for territorial assistance, $3,200,000 above the 
budget request and $1,291,000 above the fiscal year 2006 level. 
Increases to the budget request include: $400,000 within the 
Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) for additional oversight of the 
implementation of the Compacts of Free Association and other 
increased territorial workload; $800,000 within technical 
assistance for payments to replace the Prior Service Trust 
Fund, $1,000,000 for specific insular measures and assessments, 
and $1,000,000 in technical assistance to continue health care 
programs in the Marshall Islands. The funding for the Office of 
Insular Affairs has been changed to two-year availability to 
enhance office efficiencies.
    The Committee notes that the cost of infrastructure needs 
of the insular areas greatly exceeds Federal and Insular 
Government resources available to address those needs. 
Therefore, the Committee encourages the OIA to explore ways in 
which its grant funds for infrastructure can be leveraged 
through bond financings and other types of financing. Any such 
leveraging should not entail any express or implied guarantee 
by the Federal Government or otherwise provide any express or 
implied additional direct or contingent commitment of funds 
from the Federal Government.
    The Committee is encouraged by recent progress with the 
Prior Service Trust Fund and reiterates its support for the 
agreement among the pension systems of the Republic of Palau, 
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), the 
Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of 
Micronesia to assume responsibilities for the enrollees of the 
Prior Service Benefits Trust Fund. The Committee recommendation 
includes $800,000 for distribution among the pension systems 
for payments to the enrollees, provided the agreement is fully 
implemented by each jurisdiction. The Committee expects that 
this funding be reprogrammed for general technical assistance 
uses if there is a failure to implement fully the transfer of 
Prior Service Trust fund management to the insular nation and 
territorial governments.
    The Committee has also included $1,000,000 for continuation 
of health care programs in the Marshall Islands. The funds 
shall be used first to provide primary health care to members 
of the Enewetak, Bikini, Rongelap, and Utrik communities 
residing on Enewetak Atoll, Kili Island, Mejetto Island, 
Rongelap Atoll following resettlement, and Utrik Atoll. Such 
primary medical care shall consist of a clinic with at least 
one doctor and an assistant, necessary supplies, and logistical 
support.
    American Samoa.--The Committee recommends $22,880,000 for 
American Samoa operations as requested, an increase of $110,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 level. The Committee expects the 
government of American Samoa will use no less than $500,000 of 
this funding for physical education activities at schools.
    The Committee continues to be concerned about 
accountability for key Federal grants to American Samoa. The 
Secretary should enhance the inter-departmental, coordinated 
approach to oversight of all Federal grants awarded to American 
Samoa. The Committee is encouraged by recent developments by 
the American Samoa Government (ASG) to control and limit 
Federal grants. The Committee also encourages the OIA to ensure 
that single audits are completed in a timely fashion and that 
the information contained therein is widely available to all 
branches of the territorial government. The OIA should consider 
requiring the American Samoan government to complete its 
capital investment plan for a 5-year duration, and include 
specific targets for the three main sectors of health, 
education and other government needs. The OIA should require a 
prioritized list of items needed by the ASG next year, and this 
list should be developed in an open fashion with the 
territorial government.
    The Committee encourages the American Samoan government to 
not allow commercial development of waterfront areas of Utulei 
Beach Park because this site has such high recreational and 
natural values, and it has enjoyed funding from the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund Program which indicates that this park 
land should be dedicated to public outdoor recreational use in 
perpetuity.
    Northern Mariana Islands/Covenant Grants.--The Committee 
recommends $27,720,000 for CNMI covenant grants, the same as 
the budget request and the fiscal year 2006 level. The 
Committee directs the Office of Insular Affairs to implement 
the allocations presented in the budget request, however, the 
Secretary may use discretion to modify the Covenant funding 
formula to address appropriately court-ordered infrastructure 
projects in the respective territories.

                      COMPACT OF FREE ASSOCIATION
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $5,313,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         4,862,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         5,362,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................           +49,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................          +500,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:



[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $5,362,000 for the compact of free 
association, $500,000 above the budget request and $49,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 level. The Committee recommendation 
continues Enewetak support.

                        Departmental Management


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $130,238,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       118,845,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       118,303,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -11,935,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................          -542,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $118,303,000 for salaries and 
expenses for departmental management, a decrease of $11,935,000 
below the fiscal year 2006 enacted and $542,000 below the 
budget request. Changes to the request include decreases of 
$128,000 for environmental policy and compliance, $14,000 for 
indirect cost negotiations and $400,000 for hearings and 
appeals. The Committee was unable to provide programmatic 
increases due to the bill's restrictive budget allocation.
    Departmental programs that have been denied requested 
programmatic 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 does not support the Department's continued 
efforts to turn over responsibility for the three Indian 
museums, operated by the Department, to non-federal interests. 
The Committee strongly urges the Department to stop pursuing 
this course of action.
    Financial Management System.--The Committee continues to be 
concerned about the development of the new financial management 
system at a time when budget allocations are in serious 
decline. Staffing at the bureaus is being reduced at an 
alarming rate due in part to the absorption of pay and other 
fixed costs and insufficient budget requests. The Committee is 
aware that not only did the Interior system encounter problems, 
which delayed the project a year, but other major departments 
such as NASA and the Veterans Administration have also 
experienced delays and cost overruns. The current system must 
be replaced over time. The Committee cautions the Department to 
ensure that these funds are used wisely and that unnecessary 
costs and delays are avoided. These funds are coming at the 
expense of critical ongoing agency programs.
    Land Appraisal Office.--Several years ago, at the request 
of the Department, the Committee reluctantly agreed to 
consolidate the Interior Department's land appraisal services 
into a central office in the Department. It has been the 
experience of the Committee that centralization of services 
often does not yield either the cost savings or efficiencies 
that are promised. This is certainly the case to date with the 
appraisal function consolidation.
    The Committee waited two years before asking the Government 
Accountability Office (GAO) to review the new alignment for 
appraisal services. The report will be finalized in August, but 
the Committee is seriously concerned about the preliminary 
findings as of April 2006. There are issues of serious 
implementation challenges and a lack of leadership, guidance 
and procedures from the Appraisal Services Directorate. There 
are also serious compliance issues, problems with the quality 
of appraisals, and significant delays in processing.
    The Committee will not make a final determination until the 
release of the final report, but cautions the Department to 
take a serious look at the performance of its top managers 
before it attempts to attribute these problems to the 
individual bureaus. The evidence to date does not support the 
latter.
    The Committee is concerned by continuing reports from 
employees of the Department of the Interior about potential 
environmental health problems created as a result of the ten-
year construction and modernization project for the 
Department's main building in Washington, D.C. The Committee 
requests that the Secretary conduct a review of these concerns 
on an expedited basis and submit a report of the results of 
this review to the Committee not later than September 1, 2006. 
This report is expected to reflect a formal evaluation of the 
existence of any worker safety problems, a corrective action 
plan for any problems which are documented, and specific 
responses to each of the recommendation of the National 
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health promulgated in 
their letter in their letter to the Department on February 3, 
2006. In addition the Committee encourages the Secretary to 
establish as soon as possible a formal process through which 
these issues can be discussed with employees.

                       PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES

    Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) provide 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, 2006...........................      $232,528,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       198,000,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       228,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -4,528,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +30,000,000
    The Committee recommends $228,000,000 for PILT, $30,000,000 
above the budget request and $4,528,000 below the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.

                    CENTRAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS FUND

    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.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $9,710,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         9,923,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         9,923,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +213,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $9,923,000 for the central 
hazardous materials fund, as requested, an increase of $213,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. Prior to fiscal year 
2006 this account was located in the Bureau of Land Management.

                        Office of the Solicitor


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $54,624,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        56,755,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        56,755,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +2,131,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $56,755,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Office of the Solicitor, the same as the budget 
request and an increase of $2,131,000 above the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.

                      Office of Inspector General


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $38,541,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        40,699,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        39,688,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +1,147,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        -1,011,000
    The Committee recommends $39,688,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Office of Inspector General, a decrease of 
$1,011,000 from the budget request and an increase of 
$1,147,000 above the enacted level. The Committee could not 
provide funds for programmatic increases due to the bill's 
restrictive budget allocation. The Committee greatly values 
this office and the important contributions it makes to the 
performance of the Department and its bureaus.

             Office of Special Trustee for American Indians

    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 46 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 $300 
million per year are collected for approximately 277,000 
individual Indian money accounts, and about $518 million per 
year is collected for about 1,450 tribal accounts per year. In 
addition, the trust manages approximately $2.9 billion in 
tribal funds and $420 million in individual Indian funds.

                         FEDERAL TRUST PROGRAMS
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $188,774,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       185,036,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       150,036,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -38,738,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       -35,000,000
    The Committee recommends $150,036,000 for Federal Trust 
programs, $35,000,000 below the budget request and $38,738,000 
below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    Program Operations, Support, and Improvements.--The 
Committee recommends $162,886,000 for program operations, 
support and improvements, $20,000,000 below the budget request 
and $23,689,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The 
total change from the request is a reduction of $35,000,000 for 
historical accounting which includes the use of $15,000,000 of 
prior year unobligated funds to offset 2007 requirements.
    Executive Direction.--The Committee recommends $2,150,000 
for executive direction the same as the budget request, and 
$49,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    Since 1996, the Committee has appropriated hundreds of 
millions of dollars for activities related to the Cobell 
litigation. The Committee believes that these funds would have 
been better used to fund greatly needed health, law enforcement 
and education programs in Indian country. The Committee 
believes that this case must be resolved without further 
negatively impacting funding levels for Indian programs. The 
budget documents indicate continuing talks regarding a possible 
settlement of the Cobell. The Committee recognizes that, in 
addition to the mediation talks that have taken place, the 
House and Senate authorizing Committees have made commitments 
to develop a comprehensive legislative solution to this ongoing 
problem. However, the Committee remains concerned that there 
has been a continued use of Bureau of Indian Affairs, Operation 
of Indian Programs appropriated funds to pay for ongoing 
litigation support costs. Without a solution, this practice 
will continue to erode programmatic funding in Indian country. 
Therefore, the Committee directs the Department to report 
quarterly on the use of Bureau of Indian Affairs, Operation of 
Indian Programs funds for ongoing litigation support costs 
associated with the Cobell case.
    Bill Language.--As in previous years, the Committee has 
included bill language under the Office of Special Trustee that 
limits the amount of funding available for historical 
accounting to $45,000,000. The clear intent of the Committee is 
to definitively limit the amount of funding available to 
conduct historical accounting activities.

                       INDIAN LAND CONSOLIDATION
 Appropriation enacted, 20006..........................        34,006,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       $59,449,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        34,006,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       -25,443,000
    The Committee recommends $34,006,000 for Indian Land 
Consolidation, $25,443,000 below the budget request and the 
same as the fiscal year 2006 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 $32 million in receipts in 
fiscal year 2006, 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, 2006...........................        $6,016,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         6,109,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         6,109,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................           +93,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $6,109,000, the budget request, 
for the natural resource damage assessment fund, an increase of 
$93,000 above the fiscal year 2006 level.

             General Provisions, Department of the Interior

    Sections 101 and 102 provide for emergency transfer 
authority with the approval of the Secretary.
    Section 103 provides for the use of appropriations for 
certain services.
    Sections 104 through 106 prohibit the expenditure of funds 
for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil leasing activities in certain 
areas. These OCS provisions are addressed under the Minerals 
Management Service.
    Section 107 permits the transfer of funds between the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee for 
American Indians.
    Section 108 continues a provision permitting the 
redistribution of tribal priority allocation and tribal base 
funds to alleviate funding inequities.
    Section 109 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 110 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 111 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 112 continues a provision prohibiting the closure 
of the underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns NP, NM.
    Section 113 continues a provision preventing the demolition 
of a bridge between New Jersey and Ellis Island.
    Section 114 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 115 continues a provision allowing the Secretary to 
pay private attorney fees for employees and former employees in 
connection with Cobell v. Norton.
    Section 116 continues a provision dealing with the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service's responsibilities for mass marking 
of salmonid stocks.
    Section 117 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 118 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
funds to study or implement a plan to drain or reduce water 
levels in Lake Powell.
    Section 119 allows the National Indian Gaming Commission to 
collect $13,000,000 in fees for fiscal year 2008.
    Section 120 makes funds appropriated for fiscal year 2006 
available to the tribes within the California Tribal Trust 
Reform Consortium and others on the same basis as funds were 
distributed in fiscal year 2005, and separates this 
demonstration project from the Department of the Interior's 
trust reform reorganization.
    Section 121 provides for the renewal of certain grazing 
permits in the Jarbidge Field office of the Bureau of Land 
Management.
    Section 122 authorizes the acquisition of lands and leases 
for Ellis Island.
    Section 123 permits the Secretary of the Interior to issue 
grazing permits within the Mojave National Preserve.
    Section 124 implements rules concerning winter snowmobile 
use on Yellowstone National Park.
    Section 125 prohibits the use of funds for Center of 
Excellence and partnership ``Skills Bank Training without 
Committee approval.

               TITLE II--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

    The Environmental Protection Agency was created by 
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970, which consolidated nine 
programs from five different agencies and departments. Major 
EPA programs include air and water quality, drinking water, 
hazardous waste, research, pesticides, radiation, toxic 
substances, enforcement and compliance assurance, pollution 
prevention, oil spills, Superfund, Brownfields, and the Leaking 
Underground Storage Tank program. In addition, EPA provides 
Federal assistance for wastewater treatment, sewer overflow 
control, drinking water facilities, and other water 
infrastructure projects. The agency is responsible for 
conducting research and development, establishing environmental 
standards through the use of risk assessment and cost-benefit 
analysis, monitoring pollution conditions, seeking compliance 
through a variety of means, managing audits and investigations, 
and providing technical assistance and grant support to States 
and tribes, which are delegated authority for actual program 
implementation. Under existing statutory authority, the Agency 
may contribute to specific homeland security efforts and may 
participate in some international environmental activities.
    Among the statutes for which the Environmental Protection 
Agency has sole or significant oversight responsibilities are:
        National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended.
        Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, as 
        amended.
        Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended.
        Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
        Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, as amended.
        Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 
        1972, as amended.
        Oil Pollution Act of 1990.
        Public Health Service Act (Title XIV), as amended.
        Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended.
        Clean Air Act, as amended.
        Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended.
        Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002.
        Bioterrorism Act of 2002.
        Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
        Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended.
        Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields 
        Revitalization Act of 2002 (amending CERCLA).
        Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 
        1986.
        Pollution Prevention Act of 1990.
        Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended.
        Pollution Prosecution Act of 1990.
        Pesticide Registration Improvement Act of 2003.
    For fiscal year 2007, the Committee recommends 
$7,566,870,000 for the Environmental Protection Agency, a 
decrease of $58,546,000 below the fiscal year 2006 level and 
$251,395,000 above the budget request. Changes to the budget 
request are detailed in each of the appropriation accounts 
below.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Committee expects the EPA to continue to prepare its 
budget justification in the order specified in the table 
accompanying this report. There should be an explanation of 
every program/project, including those proposed for 
elimination. Each program/project should provide details and 
funding for each program and project element funded in the 
current year and the proposed funding for each element in the 
budget year along with an explanation of any increase or 
decrease in funding and any change in emphasis.
    2. The Committee was extremely disappointed with some of 
the EPA responses to Committee hearing questions for the 
record. EPA, in several instances, reported that it could not 
explain the impact on programs and projects of proposed 
reductions because the allocation of funds was yet to be 
determined. EPA should not propose program reductions if it 
cannot clearly identify the impact of those reductions on 
programs and projects. These details should be included in the 
Congressional budget justification.
    3. The Committee has included the fixed cost increases 
proposed in the budget request for EPA. Any additional fixed 
cost increases not included in the appropriation for fiscal 
year 2007 should be absorbed through FTE reductions, which 
should be achieved through attrition.
    4. The Committee continues to believe that the EPA needs to 
do a better job of using limited staff resources and commends 
the EPA for initiating a workforce assessment. A thorough 
analysis of staffing in the Regional Offices should be 
conducted and staffing and funding should be realigned as 
indicated by that analysis. In addition, those States that are 
doing a good job of running their programs do not need as much 
oversight as States that have problems with program 
implementation. EPA should consider differential oversight and 
focus its limited resources on States that have problems while 
providing somewhat less oversight to States with adequate 
programs and minimal oversight to States with excellent 
programs. The State oversight analysis should be done on a 
program by program basis.
    5. EPA and the States focus on the number of environmental 
pollution permits issued, the number of environmental standards 
established, the number of facilities inspected, and other such 
outputs of performance. These measures can provide important 
information for EPA and State managers but they do not measure 
the actual environmental outcomes that must be known to ensure 
that resources are being allocated in the most cost effective 
ways to improve environmental conditions and public health. 
Further, the Government Accountability Office, EPA's Office of 
Inspector General, and the National Academy of Public 
Administration have identified ways that EPA can achieve its 
goals more efficiently and effectively by moving from 
traditional and intensive enforcement and compliance activities 
to more cost effective, efficient, and results oriented 
approaches. The Committee expects EPA to make substantive 
changes in these areas in 2007 and to include a description of 
those changes in the 2008 budget justification.
    6. The Committee has included modest increases for certain 
programs authorized by the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and for 
Homeland Security initiatives. Given the limited funding 
available for this bill and the need to restore funding for 
mission essential programs and high priority projects that were 
reduced or eliminated in the budget request, the Committee was 
unable to provide a sizable portion of the $80 million increase 
requested for programs associated with the Energy Policy Act of 
2005 or the $55 million increase requested for Homeland 
Security programs. The Committee also did not provide funding 
for the Asia-Pacific Partnership initiative.

                         Science and Technology

    The Science and Technology account funds all Environmental 
Protection Agency research (including, by transfer of funds, 
Hazardous Substances Superfund research activities) carried out 
through grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements with 
other Federal agencies, States, universities, and private 
business, as well as in-house research. This account also funds 
personnel compensation and benefits, travel, supplies and 
operating expenses for all Agency research. Research addresses 
a wide range of environmental and health concerns across all 
environmental media and encompasses both long-term basic and 
near-term applied research to provide the scientific knowledge 
and technologies necessary for preventing, regulating, and 
abating pollution, and to anticipate emerging environmental 
issues.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $730,810,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       788,274,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       808,044,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +77,234,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +19,700,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:



[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $808,044,000 for science and 
technology, an increase of $77,234,000 above the fiscal year 
2006 level and $19,700,000 above the budget request. The 
Committee notes that the increase above the 2006 funding level 
is largely attributable to the realignment of administrative 
costs from the environmental programs and management account. 
In addition, the Committee recommends that $30,011,000 be 
transferred to this account from the Hazardous Substance 
Superfund account for ongoing research activities consistent 
with the intent of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended. Changes to 
the budget request are detailed below.
    Air Toxics and Quality.--The Committee recommends a 
decrease of $9,000,000 for Federal vehicle and fuels standards 
certification associated with implementation of the Energy 
Policy Act of 2005 renewable fuels standard.
    Climate Protection Program.--The Committee recommends an 
increase of $6,000,000 for the climate protection program to 
restore base program research funding.
    Homeland Security.--The Committee recommends a decrease of 
$25,000,000 in critical infrastructure protection for 
WaterSentinel and related training and a decrease of $5,000,000 
in preparedness, response, and recovery for the decontamination 
program.
    Research: Congressional Priorities.--The Committee 
recommends an increase of $30,000,000 for programs of national 
and regional significance including:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              State                      Project name           Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA...............................  Central California Ozone     $375,000
                                    Study, San Joaquin
                                    Valleywide Air
                                    Pollution Study Agency.
CA...............................  Irrigation Training and       250,000
                                    Research Center--Cal
                                    Poly, San Luis Obispo
                                    Flow Rate Measurement.
FL...............................  Florida Department of       1,000,000
                                    Citrus Abscission
                                    Chemical Studies.
NY...............................  Environmental Systems       2,000,000
                                    Ctr of Excellence at
                                    Syracuse Univ., Indoor
                                    environmental quality &
                                    urban ecosystems
                                    sustainability.
OH...............................  Ohio State University         500,000
                                    Oleantangy River
                                    Wetlands Park teaching,
                                    research, and outreach
                                    initiative.
OK...............................  Tulsa Air Quality Study       300,000
                                    (ozone compliance).
TX...............................  Mickey Leland National      1,500,000
                                    Urban Air Toxics
                                    Research Center.                                   American Water Works        1,000,000
                                    Association Research
                                    Foundation.
                                   Consortium for Plant          750,000
                                    Biotechnology Research.
                                   New England Green             750,000
                                    Chemistry Consortium.
                                   Southwest Center for        1,500,000
                                    Environmental Research
                                    and Policy.
                                   Water Environment           3,000,000
                                    Research Foundation.
                                   Water Systems Council       1,000,000
                                    Wellcare Program.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Research: Clean Air.--The Committee recommends an increase 
of $6,450,000 to restore funding for clean air research 
including increases of $3,950,000 for air toxics, $1,600,000 
for global change, and $900,000 for particulate monitoring 
methods and tropospheric ozone research in the National Ambient 
Air Quality Standards program.
    Human Health and Ecosystems.--The Committee recommends an 
increase of $9,755,000 to restore funding for human health and 
ecosystems research including increases of $1,400,000 for 
endocrine disruptor research, $3,355,000 for fellowships 
through the Science to Achieve Results program, and $5,000,000 
for the environmental monitoring and assessment program.
    Research: Sustainability.--The Committee recommends an 
increase of $2,405,000 to restore partially the environmental 
technology verification program.
    Toxics Research and Prevention.--The Committee recommends 
an increase of $4,160,000 to restore funding for pesticides and 
toxics research.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. Competitively awarded contract research and engineering 
services and activities for clean automotive technologies under 
the climate protection program should be funded at least at the 
2006 level.
    2. The funding recommended for the WaterSentinel program 
includes sufficient monies for one additional pilot project. 
EPA should ensure that this additional pilot project is located 
in a metropolitan area which is highly vulnerable from a 
homeland security threat perspective and which has funding 
support from the local council of governments.
    3. Any future WaterSentinel funding should be requested 
through the Department of Homeland Security and EPA should 
coordinate with the Office of Management and Budget to ensure 
this happens beginning in fiscal year 2008. While the Committee 
agrees that EPA's expertise is important for program success 
and that it had a critical role to play in establishing the 
program, the Committee also believes strongly that continuing 
program funding must be provided through the Department of 
Homeland Security.
    4. The Committee continues to stress the importance of the 
Science to Achieve Results program. Funding reductions in this 
program are not acceptable because such reductions would 
ultimately result in long term problems, with and gaps in, 
critical environmental research.

                 Environmental Programs and Management

    The Environmental Programs and Management account 
encompasses a broad range of abatement, prevention, and 
compliance activities, and personnel compensation, benefits, 
travel, and expenses for all programs of the Agency except 
Science and Technology, Hazardous Substance Superfund, Leaking 
Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund, Oil Spill Response, and 
the Office of Inspector General.
    Abatement, prevention, and compliance activities include 
setting environmental standards, issuing permits, monitoring 
emissions and ambient conditions and providing technical and 
legal assistance toward enforcement, compliance, and oversight. 
In most cases, the States are directly responsible for actual 
operation of the various environmental programs and the 
Agency's activities include oversight and assistance.
    In addition to program costs, this account funds 
administrative costs associated with the operating programs of 
the Agency, including support for executive direction, policy 
oversight, resources management, general office and building 
services for program operations, and direct implementation of 
Agency environmental programs for Headquarters, the ten EPA 
Regional offices, and all non-research field operations.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................    $2,346,711,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................     2,306,617,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................     2,336,442,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -10,269,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +29,825,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $2,336,442,000 for environmental 
programs and management, a decrease of $10,269,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 level and $29,825,000 above the budget 
request. Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
    Air Toxics and Quality.--The Committee recommends a 
decrease of $6,565,000 for air toxics and quality including a 
decrease of $2,800,000 in the Federal support for air quality 
management program for implementation of the Energy Policy Act 
of 2005 and $3,765,000 in the stratospheric ozone program for 
the multilateral fund.
    Climate Protection.--The Committee recommends a net 
decrease of $1,000,000 for climate protection programs, 
including an increase of $2,000,000 for Energy Star, a decrease 
of $2,000,000 for the methane to markets initiative, and, in 
other climate change programs, a decrease of $5,000,000 for the 
Asia-Pacific Partnership and an increase of $4,000,000 to 
restore ongoing climate change programs.
    Compliance.--The Committee recommends a decrease of 
$987,000 in the compliance monitoring program for 
implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
    Enforcement.--The Committee recommends an increase of 
$957,000 for enforcement, including a decrease of $753,000 in 
the civil enforcement program for implementation of the Energy 
Policy Act of 2005 and an increase of $1,710,000 to restore the 
environmental justice program. The Committee notes that there 
is also an increase, as requested, in the Superfund account for 
environmental justice activities.
    Environmental Protection: Congressional Priorities.--The 
Committee recommends $40,000,000 for programs of national and 
regional significance including:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              State                      Project name           Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO...............................  NE Colorado Surface          $250,000
                                    Water/Groundwater
                                    Conservation Program
                                    (Central Colorado Water
                                    Conservation District).
IA...............................  Iowa State University       1,000,000
                                    project on mitigating
                                    emissions from egg
                                    farms.
NY...............................  Central New York            2,000,000
                                    Watersheds in Onondaga,
                                    Wayne, & Cayuga
                                    Counties water quality
                                    management.
NY/CT............................  Long Island Sound           1,800,000
                                    restoration.                                   America's Clean Water       3,000,000
                                    Foundation on Farm
                                    Assessment &
                                    Environmental Review
                                    Program.
                                   Groundwater Protection        650,000
                                    Council.
                                   National Biosolids          1,000,000
                                    Partnership (Water
                                    Environment Federation).
                                   National Hispanic           1,000,000
                                    Healthy Farm Workers
                                    Initiative (Self
                                    Reliance Foundation).
                                   National Rural Water       11,000,000
                                    Association.
                                   Rural Community             3,500,000
                                    Assistance Program.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Geographic Programs.--The Committee recommends a net 
increase of $1,000,000 for geographic programs, including a 
decrease of $6,397,000 for the Corsica River watershed pilot 
project in the Chesapeake Bay program, an increase of 
$2,397,000 for competitive grants for community based efforts 
in the Chesapeake Bay program, an increase of $6,000,000 for 
the Puget Sound program, and a decrease of $1,000,000 for 
regional geographic initiatives.
    Information Exchange/Outreach.--The Committee recommends an 
increase of $9,650,000 for information exchange/outreach, 
including increases of $9,000,000 for environmental education 
and $650,000 for the exchange network.
    Legal/Science/Regulatory/Economic Review.--The Committee 
recommends a decrease of $2,000,000 for regulatory innovation.
    Operations and Administration.--The Committee recommends a 
decrease of $1,000,000 for facilities infrastructure and 
operations.
    Pesticide Licensing.--The Committee recommends an increase 
of $4,500,000 for pesticide licensing including increases of 
$2,000,000 for registration of new pesticides and $2,500,000 
for review/reregistration of existing pesticides.
    Toxics Risk Review and Prevention.--The Committee 
recommends a net decrease of $1,230,000 for toxics review and 
prevention, including an increase of $770,000 for endocrine 
disruptors and a decrease of $2,000,000 for the pollution 
prevention program.
    Underground Storage Tanks.--The Committee recommends a 
decrease of $1,500,000 in the underground storage tank program 
for implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
    Water: Ecosystems.--The Committee recommends a net decrease 
of $14,000,000 for water/ecosystems, including a decrease of 
$20,000,000 for Great Lakes Legacy Act programs and an increase 
of $6,000,000 for the National Estuary Program. Direction on 
distribution of National Estuary Program funding is provided 
below.
    Water Quality Protection.--The Committee recommends an 
increase of $2,000,000 for surface water protection to restore 
and improve the quality of rivers, lakes, and streams.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Committee recommendation includes the $2,000,000 in 
the budget request to continue the Water Information Sharing 
and Analysis Center and the Water Security Channel efforts to 
provide up to date security information for drinking water and 
wastewater utilities.
    2. No funds are provided in the Chesapeake Bay program for 
a pilot project in the Corsica River. The Committee encourages 
EPA to use the increase recommended by the Committee for 
competitive grants for community-based efforts and to award 
grants based upon their contribution to pounds of nitrogen, 
phosphorous, and sediment removed. The Committee also expects 
the Chesapeake Bay program to provide facilitator training to 
its staff and to use a facilitator at each of its committee, 
subcommittee, and task group meetings to ensure that those 
meetings and the subsequent actions taken achieve results. This 
also could be achieved through the use of trained facilitators 
associated with State and other partner organizations.
    3. A total of $6,000,000 is provided for the Puget Sound 
geographic program under section 320 of the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act, as amended. This program is to be 
administered by the Washington State Department of Ecology.
    4. A total of $24,417,000 is included for the National 
Estuary Program (NEP), which includes $500,000 for each of the 
28 NEP estuaries and $10,417,000 for other activities in 
support of the program.
    5. EPA should encourage local governments and communities 
to pursue innovative public-private partnerships, such as the 
Adopt-A-Waterway program, which, at no additional cost to 
taxpayers, help to implement storm water pollution prevention 
activities, curb urban runoff, and improve water quality. 
Further, EPA should work with the States to enter into public-
private partnerships, such as Adopt-A-Waterway, to fulfill 
their public education and outreach responsibilities.
    6. The Pesticide Safety Education Program should continue 
to be funded at $1,200,000 in fiscal year 2007 using the 
services of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Cooperative 
State Research, Education and Extension Service.
    7. The Committee commends the Agriculture Container 
Recycling Council for its development of a voluntary program 
for recycling agricultural and professional specialty 
pesticides containers. This program has facilitated the proper 
disposal of millions of plastic pesticide containers at no cost 
to farmers. The EPA has been developing regulations on this 
recycling and, to ensure the program remains a viable, free 
service that is available to agricultural producers, the 
Committee expects EPA to issue a final rulemaking on the 
recycling of high density polyethylene pesticide containers 
within 60 days of enactment of this Act.
    8. There are a number of environmental changes associated 
with global climate change that may have a direct impact on 
human health. Much of the country may experience more serious 
air pollution, increased number of heat waves, and the 
emergence of more pest borne diseases. Certain vulnerable 
populations will suffer the most, in particular the very 
young and the very old. In order to better understand and plan 
for these problems, the EPA should contract with the National 
Academies of Science to conduct a study of the potential 
health impacts of global climate change on the U.S. 
population at large, and especially on the young, the elderly, 
those with respiratory diseases, and those in communities 
situated in areas particularly vulnerable to pollution and 
other environmental problems including minority communities. 
The study should also review and make recommendations on 
areas that the United Sates needs to improve medical 
preparedness and response capabilities and public health 
systems to deal with the health impacts associated with 
increased pollution and other environmental changes. The 
Committee expects the EPA to provide $1 million within 
available funds to support this study in fiscal year 2007. 

                      Office of Inspector General

    The Office of Inspector General (OIG) provides audit, 
evaluation, and investigation products and advisory services to 
improve the performance and integrity of EPA programs and 
operations. This account funds personnel compensation and 
benefits, travel, and expenses (excluding rent, utilities, and 
security costs) for the Office of Inspector General. In 
addition to the funds provided under this heading, the OIG 
receives funds by transfer from the Hazardous Substance 
Superfund account.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $36,904,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        35,100,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        35,100,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        -1,804,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $35,100,000, the budget request, 
for the Office of Inspector General, a decrease of $1,804,000 
below the fiscal year 2006 level. In addition, the Committee 
recommends that $13,316,000, as requested, be transferred to 
this account from the Hazardous Substance Superfund account.
    Bill Language.--Bill Language is recommended providing 
that, notwithstanding any other provision of law, in fiscal 
year 2007 and thereafter, the EPA Inspector General shall not 
serve as the IG for the Chemical Safety and Hazard 
Investigation Board.

                        Buildings and Facilities

    The Buildings and Facilities account provides for the 
design and construction of EPA-owned facilities as well as for 
the repair, extension, alteration, and improvement of 
facilities used by the Agency. The funds are used to correct 
unsafe conditions, protect health and safety of employees and 
Agency visitors, and prevent deterioration of structures and 
equipment.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $39,626,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        39,816,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        39,816,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +190,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $39,816,000, the budget request, 
for buildings and facilities, an increase of $190,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 level.

                     Hazardous Substance Superfund


                     (INCLUDING TRANSFERS OF FUNDS)

    The Hazardous Substance Superfund (Superfund) program was 
established in 1980 by the Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act to clean up emergency 
hazardous materials, spills, and dangerous, uncontrolled, and/
or abandoned hazardous waste sites. The Superfund Amendments 
and Reauthorization Act (SARA) expanded the program 
substantially in 1986, authorizing approximately $8,500,000,000 
in revenues over five years. In 1990, the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act extended the program's authorization through 
1994 for $5,100,000,000 with taxing authority through calendar 
year 1995.
    The Superfund program is operated by EPA subject to annual 
appropriations from a dedicated trust fund and from general 
revenues. Enforcement activities are used to identify and 
induce parties responsible for hazardous waste problems to 
undertake clean-up actions and pay for EPA oversight of those 
actions. In addition, responsible parties have been required to 
cover the cost of fund-financed removal and remedial actions 
undertaken at spills and waste sites by Federal and State 
agencies. Transfers from this account are made to the Office of 
Inspector General and Science and Technology accounts for 
Superfund related activities.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................    $1,242,074,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................     1,258,955,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................     1,256,855,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +14,781,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        -2,100,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    The Committee recommends $1,256,855,000 for hazardous 
substance Superfund, an increase of $14,781,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $2,100,000 below the budget 
request. Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
    Enforcement.--The Committee recommends a decrease of 
$3,000,000 for Superfund enforcement, which leaves an increase 
of almost $4 million above the 2006 level.
    Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery.--
The Committee recommends a decrease of $10,300,000 for homeland 
security: preparedness, response, and recovery, including 
decreases of $1,800,000 for decontamination and $8,500,000 for 
laboratory preparedness and response.
    Operations and Administration.--The Committee recommends a 
decrease of $1,000,000 in the acquisition management program 
for contract workforce education.
    Research: Land Protection.--The Committee recommends an 
increase of $2,200,000 research, including increases of 
$1,000,000 for land protection and restoration and $1,200,000 
to continue the Superfund innovative technology evaluation 
program.
    Superfund Cleanup.--The Committee recommends an increase of 
$10,000,000 to restore base funding for Superfund cleanup 
including increases of $1,000,000 for emergency response and 
removal, $1,000,000 for EPA emergency preparedness, $7,000,000 
for the remedial program, and $1,000,000 for support to other 
Federal agencies.
    Bill Language.--Bill language is included transferring 
funds to the Office of Inspector General and to the Science and 
Technology account. The funding transfer to the Science and 
Technology account is increased above the budget request by 
$2,200,000, which includes increases of $1,000,000 for land 
protection and restoration research and $1,200,000 for the 
Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation program (SITE).
    Report Language:
    1. The Committee believes that the Superfund Innovative 
Technology Evaluation program is an important element of the 
Superfund program and does not agree with eliminating SITE 
funding as proposed in the budget request.
    2. Within the funds provided for support to other Federal 
agencies, the U.S. Coast Guard should receive at least 
$5,200,000.

                Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program

    Subtitle I of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as amended by 
the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, authorized 
the establishment of a response program for clean-up of 
releases from leaking underground storage tanks. Owners and 
operators of facilities with underground tanks must demonstrate 
financial responsibility and bear initial responsibility for 
clean-up. The Federal trust fund is funded through the 
imposition of a motor fuel tax of one-tenth of a cent per 
gallon, which generates approximately $170,000,000 per year.
    Most States also have their own leaking underground storage 
tank programs, including a separate trust fund or other funding 
mechanism, in place. The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust 
Fund provides additional clean-up resources and may also be 
used to enforce necessary corrective actions and to recover 
costs expended from the Fund for clean-up activities. The 
underground storage tank response program is designed to 
operate primarily through cooperative agreements with States. 
However, funds are also used for grants to non-State entities, 
including Indian tribes, under Section 8001 of the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $79,953,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        72,759,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        72,759,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        -7,194,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $72,759,000, the budget request, 
for the leaking underground storage tank program, a decrease of 
$7,194,000 below the fiscal year 2006 level, which included one 
time supplemental funding to address hurricane damage in 
Louisiana and Mississippi.

                           Oil Spill Response

    This appropriation, authorized by the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act, as amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 
1990, provides funds to prepare for and prevent releases of oil 
and other petroleum products in navigable waterways. In 
addition, EPA is reimbursed for incident specific response 
costs through the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund managed by the 
United States Coast Guard.
    EPA is responsible for directing all clean-up and removal 
activities posing a threat to public health and the 
environment; conducting site inspections; providing a means to 
achieve cleanup activities by private parties; reviewing 
containment plans at facilities; reviewing area contingency 
plans; pursuing cost recovery of fund-financed clean-ups; and 
conducting research of oil clean-up techniques. Funds for this 
appropriation are provided through the Oil Spill Liability 
Trust Fund which is composed of fees and collections made 
through provisions of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, the 
Comprehensive Oil Pollution Liability and Compensation Act, the 
Deepwater Port Act of 1974, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands 
Act Amendments of 1978, and the Federal Water Pollution Control 
Act, as amended. Pursuant to law, the Trust Fund is managed by 
the United States Coast Guard.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $15,629,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        16,506,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        16,506,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +877,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $16,506,000, the budget request, 
for oil spill response, an increase of $877,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                   State and Tribal Assistance Grants

    The State and Tribal Assistance Grants account provides 
grant funds for programs operated primarily by State, local, 
tribal and other governmental partners. The account provides 
funding for infrastructure projects through the State Revolving 
Funds, geographic specific projects in rural Alaska and Alaska 
Native Villages, Puerto Rico, and on the United States-Mexico 
Border, and other targeted special projects. In addition, the 
account funds Brownfields assessment and revitalization grants, 
grants for clean school buses, and miscellaneous other 
categorical grant programs.
    The largest portion of the STAG account consists of State 
Revolving Funds (SRFs), which provide Federal financial 
assistance to protect the Nation's water resources. The Clean 
Water SRFs help eliminate municipal discharge of untreated or 
inadequately treated pollutants and thereby help maintain or 
restore the country's water to a swimmable and/or fishable 
quality. The Clean Water SRFs provide resources for municipal, 
inter-municipal, State, and interstate agencies and tribal 
governments to plan, design, and construct wastewater 
facilities and other projects, including non-point source, 
estuary, stormwater, and sewer overflow projects. The Safe 
Drinking Water SRFs finance improvements to community water 
systems so that they can achieve compliance with the mandates 
of the Safe Drinking Water Act and continue to protect public 
health.
    Categorical grant programs include non-point source grants 
under Section 319 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 
as amended, Public Water System Supervision grants, Section 106 
water quality grants, grants to improve targeted watersheds, 
Clean Air Act Section 105 and 103 air grants targeted to 
environmental information, Brownfields cleanup grants, and 
other grants used by the States, tribes, and others to meet 
Federal environmental statutory and regulatory requirements.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................    $3,213,709,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................     2,797,448,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................     3,007,348,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................      -206,361,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................      +209,900,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $3,007,348,000 for State and 
tribal assistance grants, a decrease of $206,361,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level and $209,900,000 above the 
budget request. These numbers do not reflect the one-time 
rescission of $80 million in fiscal year 2006 from expired 
contracts, grants and interagency agreements. While the 
rescission was included under the STAG heading, it applied to 
all EPA appropriation accounts and did not affect base program 
funding in any account for fiscal year 2006. Changes to the 
budget request are detailed below.
    Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water State Revolving 
Fund.--The Committee recommends a decrease of $23,500,000 for 
diesel emissions reduction grants.
    State and Tribal Infrastructure Grants/Congressional 
Priorities.--The Committee recommends an increase of 
$200,000,000 for targeted STAG infrastructure grants including 
the following:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Grantee city/county--
                           State             Grantee name             description                 Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.                 AL..................  City of Glencoe.....  Glencoe--Storm drainage                  $330,000
                                                                & sewer system
                                                                improvements.
2.                 AL..................  City of Jasper......  Jasper Corridor X--                     1,400,000
                                                                Interchange sewer
                                                                project.
3.                 AL..................  City of Scottsboro..  Scottsboro--Water                         242,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
4.                 AR..................  Northwest Arkansas    Rogers--Water &                           750,000
                                          Conservation          wastewater
                                          Authority.            infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
5.                 AR..................  Southside Public      Batesville--Wastewater                     50,000
                                          Water Authority.      infrastructure planning.
6.                 AR..................  Town of Etowah......  Etowah--Wastewater                         41,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
7.                 AZ..................  City of Mesa........  Mesa--Arsenic mitigation                  500,000
                                                                water infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
8.                 AZ..................  City of Safford.....  Safford--Wastewater                     1,000,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
9.                 CA..................  Bighorn-Desert View   Landers--Water &                          500,000
                                          Water Agency.         wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements (water
                                                                resources plan).
10.                CA..................  City of Arcadia.....  Arcadia & Sierra Madre--                1,000,000
                                                                Water infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
11.                CA..................  City of Banning.....  Banning--Water &                          500,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements (Brinton
                                                                Reservoir).
12.                CA..................  City of Beaumont....  Beaumont--Water &                         500,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements (recycled
                                                                water reservoir).
13.                CA..................  City of Bellflower..  Bellflower--Water                         300,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
14.                CA..................  City of Calimesa....  Calimesa--Water &                         600,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements (storm
                                                                drain project).
15.                CA..................  City of Colfax......  Colfax--Wastewater                        500,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
16.                CA..................  City of Downey......  Downey--Groundwater well                  300,000
                                                                supply.
17.                CA..................  City of Lodi........  Lodi--Water                             1,000,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
18.                CA..................  City of Placerville.  Placerville--Wastewater                 1,500,000
                                                                treatment plant upgrade
                                                                (Hangtown Creek).
19.                CA..................  Hi-Desert Water       Yucca Valley--Water &                     350,000
                                          District.             wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
20.                CA..................  Mission Springs       Desert Hot Springs--                    1,000,000
                                          Water District.       Water & wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
21.                CA..................  Monterey County       Monterey--Water                           750,000
                                          Water Resources       management
                                          Agency.
22.                CA..................  San Francisco Public  City & County of San                      700,000
                                          Utilities             Francisco--Flood
                                          Commission.           control project.
23.                CO..................  Southeastern          Pueblo/Otero/Bent/                        675,000
                                          Colorado Water        Prowers/Crowley
                                          Conservancy           Counties--Water &
                                          District.             wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
24.                CO..................  Town of Eckley......  Eckley--Water treat                       150,000
                                                                plant
25.                CT..................  City of New Haven...  New Haven--Water &                        303,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
26.                CT..................  City of Norwalk.....  Norwalk--Water &                        1,000,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
27.                CT..................  CT Regional Drinking  New Britain/Plainville/                 1,000,000
                                          Water Pipeline.       Bristol--Water
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
28.                CT..................  Town of Enfield.....  Enfield--Wastewater                       550,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
29.                FL..................  City of Largo.......  Largo--Wastewater                       2,000,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
30.                FL..................  City of West Palm     West Palm Beach--                       1,000,000
                                          Beach.                Drinking water algae
                                                                control.
31.                FL..................  Gadsden County......  Quincy--Wastewater                        490,000
                                                                infrastructure design.
32.                FL..................  Marion County.......  Ocala/Marion County--                     700,000
                                                                Silver Springs
                                                                pollution abatement
                                                                program.
33.                FL..................  Southwest Florida     Polk County--Lake Peace                 1,000,000
                                          Water Management      River & Myakka River
                                          District.             watershed & drinking
                                                                water improvements.
34.                FL..................  St. Johns River       Brevard/Orange/Osceola                  1,000,000
                                          Water Management      Counties--Expansion of
                                          District.             Taylor Creek Reservoir.
35.                FL..................  Town Of Callahan....  Callahan--Wastewater                    1,000,000
                                                                treatment plant.
36.                FL..................  Village of            Village of Wellington--                   700,000
                                          Wellington.           Water & wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
37.                GA..................  Banks County........  Homer/Banks County--                    1,000,000
                                                                Wastewater treatment
                                                                plant.
38.                GA..................  City of Albany......  Albany--Interceptor                     1,000,000
                                                                pipeline upgrade
                                                                (sewer).
39.                GA..................  City of Valdosta....  Valdosta--Water &                         500,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
40.                GA..................  Metropolitan Georgia  North Georgia--Water &                  1,000,000
                                          Water Planning        wastewater
                                          District.             infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
41.                IA..................  Riverpoint West       Des Moines--Water and                     700,000
                                          Project.              wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
42.                ID..................  City of Castleford..  Castleford--Water system                  300,000
                                                                upgrade.
43.                ID..................  City of Twin Falls..  Twin Falls--Wastewater                  1,000,000
                                                                treatment.
44.                IL..................  City of Aurora......  Aurora--Wastewater                        300,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
45.                IL..................  City of Virginia....  Virginia--Water &                       1,000,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
46.                IL..................  Kane County.........  Kane County--Water                        275,000
                                                                supply management plan.
47.                IL..................  Northeastern          Lake Forest/Lake Bluff/                   500,000
                                          Illinois Sewer        Highland Park/Highwood--
                                          Consortium.           Sewer improvements.
48.                IL..................  Village of Lynwood..  Lynwood--Water &                          281,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
49.                IL..................  Village of Orion....  Orion--Removal &                          123,000
                                                                replacement of
                                                                groundwater storage
                                                                tank.
50.                IL..................  Village of Richton    Richton Park--Water &                     190,000
                                          Park.                 wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
51.                IL..................  Village of Ridgewood  Ridgewood--Water &                        700,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
52.                IL..................  Village of Steward..  Steward--Wastewater                       300,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
53.                IL..................  Village of Sublette.  Sublette--Water &                         340,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
54.                IN..................  City of Charlestown.  Charlestown--Wastewater                   400,000
                                                                infrastucture
                                                                improvements.
55.                IN..................  City of South Bend..  South Bend--Sewer                       1,000,000
                                                                overflow sensory
                                                                control network.
56.                IN..................  Dearborn County       Dearborn County--                         600,000
                                          Regional Sewer        Wastewater
                                          District.             infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
57.                IN..................  Town of Merrillville  Merrillville--Water &                     500,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
58.                IN..................  Wadesville/           Wadesville--Wastewater                  1,000,000
                                          Blairsville           infrastructure
                                          Regional Sewer        improvements.
                                          District.
59.                KS..................  Chautauqua County     Sedan--Water                            1,000,000
                                          Rural Water           infrastructure
                                          District No 4.        improvements.
60.                KS..................  City of Fairway.....  Fairway and Mission--                     500,000
                                                                Water and wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
61.                KY..................  City of Harlan......  City of Harlan--Sewer                   1,500,000
                                                                line expansion.
62.                KY..................  City of Warsaw......  Warsaw--Water and                         400,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
63.                KY..................  Louisville            Louisville--Combined                    1,000,000
                                          Metropolitan Sewer    sewer & sanitary sewer
                                          District.             overflow mitigation.
64.                KY..................  Oldham County Sewer   Goshen--Wastewater                        700,000
                                          District.             infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
65.                LA..................  City of Monroe......  Monroe--Water &                         1,000,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
66.                LA..................  West Jefferson        Metairie--Water                           385,000
                                          Medical Center.       infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
67.                MA..................  City of Boston......  Boston--Water                             750,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements
                                                                (groundwater depletion).
68.                MA..................  City of Northampton.  Northampton--Drinking                     500,000
                                                                water filtration plant.
69.                MA..................  Pioneer Valley        West Springfield--                      1,500,000
                                          Planning Commission.  Combined sewer overflow
                                                                cleanup.
70.                MD..................  City of College Park  College Park--Watershed                   100,000
                                                                stormwater management
                                                                plan.
71.                MI..................  City of Detroit,      Detroit--Water &                        1,000,000
                                          Water and Sewerage    wastewater
                                          Department.           infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
72.                MI..................  Oakland County Drain  Waterford--Evergreen/                   1,000,000
                                          Commission.           Farmington sanitary
                                                                sewer overflow control.
73.                MI..................  Wayne County........  Wayne County--Water &                   1,000,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
74.                MN..................  City of Minneapolis.  Minneapolis--Wastewater                 1,000,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
75.                MO..................  City of Joplin......  Joplin--Wastewater                      1,100,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
76.                MS..................  Tate County School    Independence--Water                       825,000
                                          District.             infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
77.                MT..................  City of Conrad......  Conrad--Wastewater                        750,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
78.                NC..................  Brunswick County....  Bolivia--Waccamaw                         375,000
                                                                waterline extension.
79.                NC..................  Caldwell County.....  Lenoir & Morgantown--                     750,000
                                                                Water & wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
80.                NC..................  City of Charlotte...  Charlotte--Sardis Road                    750,000
                                                                booster station
                                                                expansion.
81.                NC..................  City of Durham......  Durham--Water &                           250,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
82.                NC..................  City of Marion......  Marion--Water &                         1,000,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
83.                NC..................  Montgomery County     Montgomery County--Water                  500,000
                                          Pump Station          infrastructure
                                          Improvement Project.  improvements.
84.                NC..................  Stanly County Water   Stanly County--Water                      500,000
                                          Improvement Project.  infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
85.                NC..................  Town of Ahoskie.....  Ahoskie--Wastewater                       750,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
86.                NC..................  Town of Cary........  Cary--Regional water                      750,000
                                                                reclamation facility
                                                                planning/design/
                                                                permitting.
87.                NC..................  Town of Elkin.......  Elkin/Jonesville/Rhonda--                 750,000
                                                                Wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
88.                NC..................  Town of Laurel Park.  Laurel Park--Water &                    1,760,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
89.                NC..................  Tuckaseigee Water     Sylva--Water &                            574,000
                                          and Sewer Authority.  wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
90.                NE..................  City of South Sioux   South Sioux City--                      1,000,000
                                          City.                 Sanitary sewer crossing
                                                                between Nebraska & Iowa.
91.                NH..................  City of Somersworth.  Somersworth--Wastewater                   700,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
92.                NJ..................  Borough of Dumont...  Borough of Dumont--Water                1,000,000
                                                                & wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
93.                NJ..................  Borough of Hopatcong  Borough of Hopatcong--                  1,000,000
                                                                Wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
94.                NM..................  Albuquerque           Albuquerque--Water                      1,000,000
                                          Bernalillo Water      infrastructure
                                          Utility Authority.    improvements.
95.                NV..................  Moapa Valley Water    Overton--Arsenic                        1,000,000
                                          District.             treatment facility.
96.                NY..................  City of Goshen......  Goshen--Water                             300,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
97.                NY..................  City of Rye.........  Rye--Sewer pump station                   200,000
                                                                repairs.
98.                NY..................  Monroe County Water   Rochester--Reservoir                    1,000,000
                                          Authority.            cover
99.                NY..................  NY Botanical Garden.  Bronx--Water &                            500,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements (Twin
                                                                Lakes).
100.               NY..................  Saratoga County.....  Ballston Spa--Water                     1,000,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
101.               NY..................  Town of Bethel......  Bethel--Water &                         1,000,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
102.               NY..................  Town of Greenburgh,   Town of Greenburgh--                      300,000
                                          NY.                   Stormwater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
103.               NY..................  Town of Lancaster...  Lancaster--Water &                      1,000,000
                                                                wastewater                       
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
104.               NY..................  Town of New Windsor,  New Windsor--Wastewater                   700,000
                                          NY.                   infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
105.               OH..................  Butler County Board   Butler County--                         1,000,000
                                          of Commissioners.     Wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
106.               OH..................  City of Jeromesville  Jeromesville--Wastewater                1,000,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
107.               OH..................  City of Perrysburg..  City of Perrysburg--                      300,000
                                                                Wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
108.               OH..................  Fayette County......  Fayette County--Water &                 1,575,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
109.               OH..................  Ottawa County.......  Ottawa County--Water &                  1,000,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
110.               OK..................  City of Wewoka......  City of Wewoka--Water                     165,000
                                                                tower
111.               PA..................  Bucks County Water    Warrington Township--                   1,000,000
                                          and Sewer Authority.  Wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
112.               PA..................  Cecil Township        Cecil Township--                          750,000
                                          Municipal Authority.  Wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
113.               PA..................  City of Beaver Falls  Beaver Falls--Wastewater                  258,000
                                                                infrastructure &
                                                                streambank
                                                                stabilization.
114.               PA..................  Clinton County        Lock Haven--Sewer pump                    500,000
                                          Municipal Authority.  station.
115.               PA..................  Delaware County       Chester--Water &                          200,000
                                          Regional Water        wastewater
                                          Quality Control       infrastructure
                                          Authority.            improvements.
116.               PA..................  Duboistown Borough    Duboistown--Sewage pump                   300,000
                                          Municipal Authority.  station replacement.
117.               PA..................  Fairmont Park         Philadelphia--Watershed                   165,000
                                          Commission.           water quality
                                                                improvements.
118.               PA..................  Jefferson Township    Jefferson Township--                    2,000,000
                                          Sewer Authority.      Expand sewer system.
119.               PA..................  New Brighton Borough  New Brighton--Water and                   500,000
                                          Sanitary Authority.   wasterwater,
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
120.               PA..................  Somerset County.....  Somerset--Interconnectio                2,000,000
                                                                n water project.
121.               RI..................  Town of Cumberland..  Cumberland--Water &                       125,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
122.               SC..................  Gaffney Board of      Gaffney--Wastewater                       500,000
                                          Public Works.         treatment plant
                                                                renovation and
                                                                expansion.
123.               SC..................  Town of Denmark.....  Denmark--Water &                          715,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
124.               SC..................  Town of Olanta......  Olanta--Water                             110,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
125.               TN..................  East TN Development   Harrogate $137,000;                     1,250,000
                                          District.             Anderson County
                                                                $275,000; Claiborne
                                                                County $838,000--Water
                                                                & wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
126.               TN..................  SE TN Development     Cleveland $500,000;                       750,000
                                          District.             Copperhill $250,000--
                                                                Water & wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
127.               TN..................  West Knox Utility     Knox County--Water &                      700,000
                                          District.             wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
128.               TX..................  Fort Bend County...   Arcola/Fresno area--                      500,000
                                                                Water & wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
129.               TX..................  City of Grandview...  Grandview--Water                          500,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
130.               TX..................  City of Jarrell.....  Jarrell--Wastewater                       350,000
                                                                treatment facility.
131.               UT..................  City of Salt Lake...  Salt Lake City--Water                     700,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
132.               VA..................  City of Alexandria    Alexandria/Arlington                      500,000
                                          and Arlington         County--Four Mile Run
                                          County.               restoration.
133.               VA..................  Fairfax County--      Fairfax County--                        1,000,000
                                          Stormwater Planning   Stormwater management.
                                          Division.
134.               VA..................  Hanover County......  Hanover County--                        1,000,000
                                                                Wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
135.               VA..................  Henry County Public   Henry County--Water                     1,000,000
                                          Service Authority.    infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
136.               VA..................  Town of Onancock....  Onancock--Wastewater                    1,000,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
137.               WA..................  Cascade Water         Bellevue--Central                         500,000
                                          Alliance.             pipeline segment/water
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
138.               WA..................  City of Carnation...  Carnation--Wasterwater                    500,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
139.               WA..................  Mason County........  Mason County/Skokomish                  1,000,000
                                                                Indian Tribe--
                                                                Wastewater
                                                                Infrastructure
                                                                Improvements.
140.               WI..................  City of Spooner.....  Spooner--Wastewater                     1,238,000
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
141.               WI..................  Lake Holcombe         Holcombe--Wastewater                    1,265,000
                                          Sanitary District.    infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
142.               WV..................  City of Milton......  Milton--Drinking water                  1,000,000
                                                                renovation & extension.
143.               WV..................  City of Pennsboro...  Pennsboro--Water &                        550,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
144.               WV..................  City of Weston......  Weston--Water &                           250,000
                                                                wastewater
                                                                infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
145.               WV..................  City of Westover....  Westover--Sanitary sewer                  825,000
                                                                service extension.
146.               WV..................  Sugar Creek Public    Frametown--Water                          500,000
                                          Service District.     infrastructure
                                                                improvements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Categorical Grants.--The Committee recommends a net 
increase of $33,400,000 for categorical grants, including 
increases of $10,300,000 for nonpoint source (Sec. 319), 
$35,100,000 for State and local air quality management, and 
$9,000,000 for targeted watersheds, and decreases of 
$20,000,000 for implementing underground storage tank 
requirements in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and $1,000,000 
for wetlands program development.
    Bill Language.--Bill language is recommended requiring that 
STAG special project funding from fiscal year 2001 or earlier 
must have an approved grant by September 1, 2007 or those funds 
will be rescinded. Language, proposed in the budget request, is 
not included limiting Clean Diesel grants to non-attainment 
areas. Language is included specifying that funds under the 
Clean Diesel program are for Federal grants. Given the limited 
funds available for this program, the Committee believes it 
should be centrally managed by EPA. Language is also included 
making a technical correction to the fiscal year 2005 
appropriation for STAG special project funding.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Committee supports the Diesel Emissions Reduction 
Grant Program and has provided $26,000,000 for that program. 
This and other important efforts, authorized by the Energy 
Policy Act of 2005, cannot be funded at the levels requested 
when there are insufficient funds requested for other critical 
mission essential programs that entail EPA research and program 
implementation by the States and EPA. The funds recommended by 
the Committee are a substantial increase over funds provided 
for diesel emission reduction efforts in 2006 and should enable 
EPA to expand its truck and school bus retrofit programs and to 
expand its idle reduction programs, including advanced truck 
stop electrification.
    2. The EPA should report to the Committee at least once a 
year and within 30 days of the close of each fiscal year with a 
list of the technical corrections it has made to STAG special 
project infrastructure grants during that fiscal year.
    3. Funds for the Targeted Watersheds program include 
$6,000,000 for the Chesapeake Bay program and should focus on 
watershed remediation. Projects should be chosen based upon 
their contribution to pounds of nitrogen, phosphorous, and 
sediment removed.
    4. The Committee is pleased that EPA is working with the 
Environmental Council of the States to assess the actual costs 
incurred by States to implement environmental regulations and 
then compare those costs with EPA estimates. The EPA should 
provide periodic briefings to the Committee on this effort.
    5. The EPA should streamline its process for responding to 
requests from States for greater flexibility in managing their 
environmental programs. These requests deserve careful 
consideration and should neither be met with an automatic 
denial nor delayed by multiple bureaucratic reviews.
    6. The Committee has not provided categorical grant funding 
for the underground storage tank program authorized in the 
Energy Policy Act of 2005. This important National issue is a 
high priority for the legislative committee of jurisdiction and 
for the Congress as a whole. The Committee suggests that EPA 
use the funds that will be freed up in 2008 from the financial 
information system replacement effort to fund this activity in 
the 2008 budget request.

                       Administrative Provisions

    Bill language is recommended limiting reimbursements for 
consultants. This language is identical to a provision carried 
in fiscal year 2005 and earlier.

                      TITLE III--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 is aware of the Administration's proposal to 
sell up to 300,000 acres of national forest system lands to 
generate revenues to fund the needs of rural schools in the 
vicinity of national forests. While the Committee believes that 
the Congress must find a fair approach to assist rural schools, 
this proposal is entirely unacceptable. The Committee feels 
that any disposal of land should occur only if there has been 
local prioritization and public input, as well as careful, site 
by site analysis. Only lands which lack Federal importance and 
which are disjunct from Federal lands, and are difficult to 
manage, should be considered for sale or trade. Furthermore, 
while the Committee applauds efforts to draw attention to the 
economic needs of rural communities near national forest areas, 
the Administration's proposal is inequitable in its basic 
funding allocation. Communities in the Southeast and Midwest 
would be net donors of acres of forest lands disposed, but 
would receive far less of the resulting revenues than would 
communities in the Pacific Northwest. The Committee looks 
forward to working with the Administration to reauthorize the 
rural schools program, but cannot support this unacceptable 
mechanism to do so.

                     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; it should 
be closely coordinated with other Federal science bureaus and 
extramural partners, and that technology transfer and practical 
applications are vital.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $277,711,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       267,791,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       280,318,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +2,607,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +12,527,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $280,318,000 for forest and 
rangeland research, an increase of $12,527,000 above the budget 
request and $2,607,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level. The Forest Service should treat the funding for the 
forest inventory and analysis (FIA) program as a budget line 
item; it is displayed as a distinct activity. Funding for FIA 
under this heading is $62,329,000, $3,000,000 above the 
requested level and $2,949,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
enacted level. The Committee notes that an additional 
$5,000,000 for the FIA program is provided within the State and 
private forestry appropriation under the forest resource 
information and analysis budget line item. There is thus a 
total increase for the two FIA program components of $5,839,000 
above the request, a $3,012,000 increase above the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.
    The Committee recommendation includes all project funding 
as stipulated in the budget request and supporting documents, 
with the following exceptions. No funding is provided for: the 
new ecosystem services initiative; Morgantown, WV pests and 
pathogen research; and the Northeastern States research 
cooperative. Program reductions are recommended for the new 
marketing and utilization research initiative (a reduction of 
$965,000 for a total recommendation of $2,500,000) and for the 
advanced wood structure consortium (a reduction of $478,000 for 
a program total of $1,000,000). Program increases are 
recommended for: the gypsy moth slow-the-spread research 
(increase of $1,407,000 above the request); sudden oak death 
research (increase of $72,000 above the request for a program 
total of $2,500,000); the southern pine beetle initiative 
(increase of $2,500,000 above the request); the Olympic Natural 
Resource Center, WA ($292,000 above the request); and the 
National agroforestry research center ($140,000 above the 
request for a program total of $786,000). Previous 
Congressional priorities in North Carolina should be maintained 
at the fiscal year 2006 funding levels. Uncontrollable cost 
increases not funded in the request receive $6,309,000 and 
$3,487,000 is provided to reestablish the fiscal year 2006 base 
program funding level.
    Bill Language.--The Committee recommends continuing bill 
language designating a specific allocation, $62,329,000, 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, 2006...........................      $308,966,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       244,410,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       228,608,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -80,358,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       -15,802,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $228,608,000 for State and private 
forestry, $15,802,000 below the budget request and $50,358,000 
below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level not counting emergency 
supplemental appropriations. Aspects of the budget request are 
approved, unless otherwise stated below. Funding levels are 
presented as changes from the request.
    Forest Health Management.--The Committee recommends 
$101,865,000 for forest health management, $17,435,000 above 
the request and $1,798,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level. Once again the Committee emphasizes its concern for 
forest health and its concern that the Administration again has 
greatly reduced its request for these important programs. The 
funding recommended is equal to the enacted funding level in 
fiscal year 2005. The Committee is also concerned about 
invasive exotic pests, which have proven to have huge impacts 
on American forests and trees. Forest health funding provides 
important control programs such as: (1) the slow-the-spread 
gypsy moth program; (2) the Asian long-horned beetle, the 
emerald ash borer, Dutch elm disease and other pests in urban 
settings; (3) adelgids in the east; and (4) various mountain 
pine beetles throughout the Rockies and the west. The Committee 
recommendation includes $16,000,000 for southern pine beetle 
forest health activities, including forest rehabilitation, 
disease prevention, and education. This consists of $5,000,000 
within the Federal lands activity and $11,000,000 within the 
cooperative lands activity to assist State and private forest 
managers.
    Federal Lands Forest Health Management.--The Committee 
recommends $54,236,000 for Federal lands forest health 
management, $4,387,000 above the request and $1,073,000 above 
the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    Cooperative Lands Forest Health Management.--The Committee 
recommends $47,629,000 for cooperative lands forest health 
management, $13,048,000 above the budget request and $725,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The Committee notes 
that the budget request maintains funding for the American 
Chestnut Foundation; this is a very worthwhile partnership.
    The Committee strongly encourages the Administration to use 
the Secretary's authority under Public Law 97-46 to fund the 
survey, evaluation, control and management of unplanned, 
emerging pest occurrences from funds available to the agencies 
or corporations of the Department of Agriculture. This approach 
has been used in the past for the Forest Service and has been 
used in previous years for emergency pest projects by the 
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
    Cooperative Fire Protection.--The Committee recommends 
$39,000,000 for cooperative fire protection, $6,182,000 above 
the request and $193,000 above the fiscal year 2006 funding 
level. The Committee notes that the cooperative fire portion of 
the national fire plan within the wildland fire management 
account includes a total of $43,000,000 for State fire 
assistance and $12,810,000 for volunteer fire assistance.
    State Fire Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$33,000,000 for State fire assistance, $6,040,000 above the 
budget request and $105,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.
    Volunteer Fire Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$6,000,000 for volunteer fire assistance, $142,000 above the 
request and $88,000 above the enacted level.
    Cooperative Forestry.--The Committee recommends $80,793,000 
for cooperative forestry, $41,448,000 below the budget request 
and $52,413,000 below the 2006 enacted level.
    Forest Stewardship.--The Committee recommends $37,000,000 
for forest stewardship, $3,120,000 above the budget request and 
$2,856,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. Increases 
to the budget request include: $300,000 for watershed 
activities in the New York City watershed (program total of 
$800,000); $320,000 for the Chesapeake Bay program (program 
total of $1,270,000); $2,000,000 for the conservation education 
activities of the Education Research Consortium of Western 
North Carolina and its partners in Pennsylvania and California; 
and $500,000 for North Carolina State University's small 
industry and wood products natural resources initiative.
    Forest Legacy Program.--The Committee recommends $9,280,000 
for forest legacy, $52,235,000 below the request and a decrease 
of $47,244,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The 
recommendation provides $12,680,000 for projects and 
administration, and uses $3,400,000 in prior year funds to 
offset the total.
    The Committee has been concerned about the internal Forest 
Service administrative policy to extend, in some cases up to 
five years, the availability of funding for individual forest 
legacy projects. This is a highly competitive and sought after 
program during a very challenging fiscal time. If a project 
encounters difficulty that prevents the timely expenditure of 
funds, the Committee should be notified and, if appropriate, 
the Service should forward a reprogramming request for those 
funds to be used for the next most highly ranked project.
    The Committee has worked with the Forest Service and the 
States to develop a credible, competitive process. The 
Committee relies on the recommendations of the State 
Committees. Therefore, projects that are not contained in the 
President's budget will not be considered. In addition, there 
will be no assumption of further phases of a particular 
project, if that project is not selected through the 
competitive process.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:
                          Project                            AmountBirdsboro Waters, PA..................................          $300,000
Willard Pond, NH......................................         3,000,000
Southern Monadnock Plateau, MA........................         2,500,000
Tahuya Headwaters Pope, WA............................         1,880,000
    Subtotal..........................................         7,680,000
Program Administration................................         5,000,000
Use of prior year funds...............................        -3,400,000
        Total.........................................        $9,280,000
    Urban and Community Forestry. --The Committee recommends 
$29,513,000 for urban and community forestry, $2,667,000 above 
the budget request and $1,100,000 above the fiscal year 2006 
level. The increase above the request includes $700,000 for 
continued support of the longstanding and successful 
northeastern Pennsylvania community forestry program and 
$500,000 for the Tacoma, WA regional urban forestry restoration 
program, and a $1,467,000 general increase to restore the base 
program nearly to the fiscal year 2006 level.
    Economic Action Programs.--As recommended by the 
Administration, the Committee has eliminated funds for the 
economic action programs, a reduction of $9,537,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 level. The Committee notes that the many 
cooperative forestry and fire programs, as well as national 
forest system programs and wildfire management programs, are 
available to assist local communities. The Committee also notes 
the cooperative biomass grant program funding of $5,000,000 
within the hazardous fuels program.
    Forest Resource Information and Analysis.--The Committee 
recommends $5,000,000 for forest resource information and 
analysis, $5,000,000 above the budget request and $412,000 
above the 2006 enacted level. These funds should focus on those 
States which provide cost-share or in-kind services to FIA, and 
should be used in partnership with the State foresters and 
others to enhance the forest inventory and analysis program.
    International Program.--The Committee recommends $6,950,000 
for the international program, $2,029,000 above the request and 
$64,000 above the fiscal year 2006 level. The Committee is 
encouraged by the successful partnerships in the international 
program and the growing importance of Forest Service expertise, 
including international support to counter invasive pests 
harming America's forests and efforts to conserve and protect 
migratory species.
    Bill Language.--The Committee recommends continuing bill 
language deriving forest legacy funds from the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund (LWCF) and language requiring notification of 
the Appropriations Committees before allocating forest legacy 
project funds.

                         NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM

    Within the National Forest System (NFS), 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 2005 over 249,000 acres of 
national forest vegetation was managed through timber sale 
activities, which produced nearly 2.1 billion board feet of 
timber volume. The NFS hosted over 204 million visits in fiscal 
year 2004. 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 NFS 
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, 2006...........................    $1,435,646,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................     1,398,066,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................     1,445,659,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +10,013,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +47,593,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    The Committee recommends $1,445,659,000 for the National 
forest system, an increase of $47,593,000 above the request and 
$10,013,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. All funds 
requested for the healthy forests initiative are included. 
Aspects of the budget request are approved, unless otherwise 
stated below. Funding levels are presented as changes from the 
request.
    Land Management Planning.--The Committee recommends 
$55,555,000 for land management planning as requested, a 
decrease of $2,120,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.
    Inventory and Monitoring.--The Committee recommends 
$166,000,000 for inventory and monitoring, $11,865,000 above 
the budget request and $638,000 below the fiscal year 2006 
level. The increase above the request is to restore partially 
the base program.
    Recreation, Heritage and Wilderness.--The Committee 
recommends $262,000,000 for recreation, heritage and 
wilderness, $11,120,000 above the budget request and $3,203,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 level. The increase above the 
request is to restore partially the base program.
    Wildlife and Fish Habitat Management.--The Committee 
recommends $131,000,000 for wildlife and fish habitat 
management, an increase of $7,452,000 above the budget request 
and $734,000 below the fiscal year 2006 level. The increase 
above the request is to restore partially existing programs.
    Grazing Management.--The Committee recommends $48,000,000 
for grazing management, $8,265,000 above the budget request and 
$174,000 above the fiscal year 2006 funding level. The increase 
above the request is to maintain existing programs.
    Forest Products.--The Committee recommends $310,114,000 for 
forest products as requested, an increase of $32,531,000 above 
the fiscal year 2006 funding level. Within this funding is a 
$500,000 increase for the base program for the National Forests 
in North Carolina. The Committee directs the service not to 
follow the Administration's proposal that focuses the large 
funding increase above last year's enacted level to a portion 
of the Pacific Northwest. The Forest Service should not follow 
the allocations in special exhibit 16 in the budget 
justification; rather, the Forest Service should use the final 
fiscal year 2005 forest products program funding allocations as 
the base from which to make the fiscal year 2007 allocations. 
The Forest Service should not use the Knutson-Vandenberg fund 
to supplant normal program funding.
    The Committee is very concerned about the manner in which 
the forest products funding and associated programs were 
allocated during fiscal year 2006. There needs to be much 
greater transparency and explanation of how the Service 
allocates funding to various regions and national forests, and 
how trade-offs are made and successful programs recognized. 
Accordingly, before allocating any forest products funding to 
the field, the Committee directs the Forest Service to provide 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations a fourteen 
day review period during which the allocations and the 
methodology can be examined.
    The Committee also recognizes that one of the many factors 
to consider when allocating funding for forest products and 
hazardous fuels programs is the need to maintain forest 
industry infrastructure. This will enhance the likelihood of 
lower cost mechanical treatments, while enhancing rural 
community stability.
    Vegetation and Watershed Management.--The Committee 
recommends $180,000,000 for vegetation and watershed 
management, a decrease of $7,582,000 below the request and an 
increase of $148,000 above the fiscal year 2006 funding level.
    Minerals and Geology Management.--The Committee recommends 
$84,000,000 for minerals and geology management, an increase of 
$2,758,000 above the request and $164,000 below the 2006 
funding level. The increase to the request is to offset 
partially the requested decrease to the environmental 
compliance program.
    Land Ownership Management.--The Committee recommends 
$91,000,000 for land ownership management, $6,715,000 above the 
budget request and $68,000 above the 2006 funding level. The 
increase above the request is to maintain existing programs.
    The Committee notes that the Washington State Wilderness 
Act of 1984 removed from wilderness designation 800 acres of 
land adjacent to the White Pass Ski Area in Washington State 
for potential ski development. The Committee notes that the 
Gifford Pinchot National Forest Land and Resource Management 
Plan allocated the 800-acre area as Developed Recreation to 
allow for ski area expansion, while concurrently inventorying 
the same land as roadless to reflect its current physical 
character. The Committee recognizes that it was the intent of 
Congress to permit ski area expansion into this 800-acre area 
and urges the Secretary of Agriculture, once the Environmental 
Impact Statement for the White Pass Ski Area's Master 
Development Plan is properly completed, to move forward 
expeditiously in approving the expansion plans in accordance 
with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations.
    Law Enforcement Operations.--The Committee recommends 
$112,000,000 for law enforcement operations, $2,000,000 above 
the budget request and $1,063,000 above the 2006 funding level. 
The increase above the request includes a total of $1,000,000 
for anti-drug activities on the Daniel Boone National Forest, 
KY, and $1,000,000 for similar work on the Mark Twain NF, MO.
    Challenge Cost-Share.--The Committee notes that the 
challenge cost share effort featured in fiscal year 2005 has 
been very successful. Hundreds of individual partner projects 
have been funded in all regions of the Nation bringing in many 
millions of dollars in partner contributions which enhance the 
national forest system and improve public services. Therefore, 
the Committee recommendation includes $5,000,000 to continue 
this program which was not included in the request, an increase 
of $566,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. These 
funds should be used in addition to, and in a complimentary 
fashion with, other challenge cost share programs included in 
the budget request for various programs. Preference should be 
given to funding projects which enhance the conditions of 
national forest system lands and waters or provide direct 
recreational services to the public. The Forest Service should 
continue to display data on these efforts in subsequent budget 
justifications.
    Other.--The Committee has provided $990,000, as requested, 
for management of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, NM, a 
reduction of $4,084,000 from the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level. The Committee expects that the Preserve management will 
open more of the area to general public use; the current 
extensive fencing to prohibit pubic access provides a very 
unfriendly welcome to the public.
    The Committee recommendation includes the full funding 
requested by the Administration for the Quincy Library Group 
project in California and for the Land Between the Lakes 
National Recreation Area, KY and TN.

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................    $1,746,091,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................     1,768,195,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................     1,810,566,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +64,475,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +42,371,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $1,810,566,000 for wildland fire 
management, an increase of $42,371,000 above the budget request 
and $64,475,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    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 wildfire suppression operations program 
is funded at the 10-year average expenditure, adjusted for 
inflation, $741,477,000, an increase of $51,291,000 above the 
enacted level.
    The Committee is concerned that the Forest Service and the 
Department of the Interior do not have a suitable or 
comprehensive plan and strategy to deal with the Nation's 
wildfire management needs. The previous momentum for the 
national fire plan seems to have waned within the 
Administration based on the selective recognition of its main 
features. Accordingly, the Committee directs the wildland fire 
management council, in partnership with the State wildfire 
agencies, to develop and implement a comprehensive and cohesive 
strategy that identifies long-term options and funding needed 
to respond to wildfire needs. This strategy should incorporate 
previous documents suggested by the States, and should indicate 
how the various planning tools, such as fire program analysis 
and LANDFIRE, fit. The strategy should address all four of the 
original national fire plan goals, as well as the research and 
development needs and management needs required to support this 
effort. As a beginning, the Committee requires a report by the 
two departments, by January 31, 2007, providing the tactical 
details on how this fundamental plan, with associated funding 
needs, will be produced by June 30, 2007.
    Wildfire Preparedness.--The Committee recommends 
$655,887,000 for wildfire preparedness as requested, a decrease 
of $4,818,000 below the enacted level.
    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 2004 and 2005. 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 2005 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 the decision.
    The Committee is very concerned about the cost and utility 
of the fire program analysis system that is being jointly 
developed with the Department of the Interior. It is not clear 
why this system is so expensive and, furthermore, it is not 
clear that the system being developed will actually be useful 
for its original purpose of determining the most cost efficient 
and effective distribution of firefighting resources. The 
overall goals of the system still are important to achieve so 
the Committee is not prepared at this time to halt development. 
However, the Committee has included bill language in title IV 
which limits funding for this effort unless and until the 
Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture 
certify in writing that the fire program analysis system will 
be completed in a timely fashion and include the full 
participation of State partners. The Committee understands that 
expert, independent technical reviews are currently underway, 
but it is especially critical that management participate at a 
high level to ensure the public that overarching goals are 
attainable in a cost effective manner.
    The Committee is concerned that the Department maintains 
sufficient readiness with its preparedness program. 
Accordingly, bill language is provided in title IV which limits 
competitive sourcing activities for wildfire program 
activities. While contracting is encouraged for activities, at 
this time it is not warranted to spend limited resources and 
time to fulfill competitive sourcing quotas.
    Wildfire Suppression Operations.--The Committee recommends 
$741,477,000 for wildfire suppression operations, a decrease of 
$4,699,000 below the request and an increase of $51,291,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 enacted funding level. The Committee 
recommendation fully meets the 10-year average expenditure 
which actually occurred, adjusted for inflation. The Committee 
notes that there is substantial carry-over funding from the 
fiscal year 2005 urgent wildfire suppression allocation which 
is still available for wildfire suppression.
    The Committee remains concerned about the high costs of 
large fire incidents. The Department of the Interior, along 
with the Forest Service, should ensure that cost containment is 
an important priority when suppressing wildland fires. 
Therefore, the Committee directs the Department of the Interior 
and the Forest Service to continue reports directed previously 
and to examine, using independent panels, any individual 
wildfire incident which results in expenses greater than 
$10,000,000.
    The Committee directs the Forest Service not to follow 
direction in the appendix to the budget of the U.S. government 
under the fire operations heading concerning early allocation 
of fire suppression funds to regions, and the direction to 
allow regions to retain unspent funds and use them for other, 
non-suppression related purposes. The Committee insists that a 
national, interdepartmental approach, with full cooperation of 
States and other partners, is needed to improve the fire 
program. The cooperative spirit would be disrupted by requiring 
regions to compete against each other as instructed in the 
budget appendix. Furthermore, moving funds out of the fire 
suppression activity during low-cost years would disrupt the 
rationale of allocating the ten-year average cost, because the 
savings afforded during low-cost years would not be available 
for the subsequent, high cost years which are bound to occur.
    The Committee has included bill language which requires the 
Forest Service to treat wildfire suppression like other non-
emergency appropriations with regard to indirect cost pools 
which support agency overhead. All programs in the agency 
should pay the full cost of operations including overhead. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Forest Service to charge 
appropriate overhead expenses to wildfire suppression in a 
manner commensurate with the method for assessing other 
activities and to continue this procedure hereafter.
    Hazardous Fuels.--The Committee recommends $296,792,000 for 
hazardous fuels reduction work, $5,000,000 above the budget 
request and $16,673,000 above the fiscal year 2006 level. The 
recommendation includes $5,000,000 for biomass grants as 
requested and an increase of $5,000,000 above the normal base 
funding for the San Bernardino NF, CA, to treat the urgent and 
dangerous situation caused by drought and a catastrophic bark 
beetle outbreak. The Committee encourages the service to 
carefully evaluate the need for fire breaks near Payson, AZ and 
proceed accordingly.
    The recommendation retains the authority to use up to 
$15,000,000 on adjacent, non-Federal lands when hazard 
reduction activities are planned on national forest system 
lands.
    The Committee commends the Service for its work on the 
hazardous fuels program but it is still not clear that funding 
is being used to address the Nation's highest priority fuels 
projects. The Committee continues to stress that the Service 
must coordinate all hazardous fuels activities with the 
Department of the Interior, State fire agencies, and community 
wildfire protection plans. The Committee expects the Service to 
provide a report to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations before distributing funds to the regions, which 
indicates clearly how funding is prioritized and allocated. 
Furthermore, all subsequent budget justifications for this 
program should clearly indicate the rationale for the requested 
budget and provide the recommended funding split and projected 
accomplishments by region or State. The Committee reiterates 
its previous directions for the Department of the Interior and 
the Department of Agriculture to have a common hazardous fuels 
allocation process to ensure funding goes to areas which 
protect communities, lives, property, and ecosystems, and which 
rewards successful field units that design projects in 
accordance with community wildfire protection plans or their 
equivalent and includes partnerships with States and others. 
The Departments need to implement in fiscal year 2007 
additional program metrics beyond merely acres treated; these 
metrics must account for important tactical goals including 
protection of communities and populations, as well as 
mechanical treatments and biomass removed.
    Rehabilitation.--The Committee has restored $5,000,000 for 
the burned area rehabilitation and restoration program, 
$3,020,000 above the budget request and $1,189,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level. As outlined in the budget 
request, the Committee expects the Forest Service, in close 
partnership with the Department of the Interior, to continue 
the native plant materials program at the fiscal year 2006 
level. The increase above the request is for general program 
delivery.
    Fire Plan Research and Development.--The Committee 
recommends includes $22,800,000 for research and development, 
$2,679,000 above the budget request and $11,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level.
    Joint Fire Sciences Program.--The Committee recommends 
$8,000,000 for the joint fire science program, an increase of 
$4,040,000 above the request and an increase of $118,000 above 
the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The Committee stresses that 
it is vital that both the Interior Department and the Forest 
Service work on these research efforts jointly, and that the 
program continue to stress practical solutions and 
collaboration with the Nation's forestry schools and other 
partners.
    Forest Health Management, Federal Lands and Co-op Lands.--
The Committee recommends $24,800,000 for the forest health 
portion of the national fire plan, including $14,800,000 for 
Federal lands and $10,000,000 for cooperative efforts with the 
States and others. This funding level is $13,446,000 above the 
request and $168,000 above the fiscal year 2006 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 a more 
integrated approach to forest health, including prevention, and 
restoration and rehabilitation of forests and rangelands. The 
Committee expects the Forest Service to focus on major 
problems, such as southern pine beetles, western mountain bark 
beetles, adelgids, and other pests and pathogens, which harm 
forests and subsequently increase wildfire hazards. The 
Committee reiterates that Federal forest health funding is 
designated for all Federal land managing bureaus so the Forest 
Service must work closely with the Department of the Interior 
to ascertain prevention, suppression and restoration needs for 
both Departments. The Committee is concerned that the 
Administration does not recognize forest health management as a 
vital component of the healthy forests initiative and a 
critical tool for reducing risks of catastrophic wildfires. 
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 Fire Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$43,000,000 for State fire assistance, $13,885,000 above the 
request and $2,816,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level. The program is essential to maintain and enhance the 
partnership between State foresters and State fire agencies and 
the Federal wildfire management enterprise. The Committee has 
focused additional funding here because the Committee has 
agreed to the Administration's request to eliminate the 
Department of the Interior State and local fire assistance 
program. The Committee expects that the Forest Service will 
work closely with Interior bureaus to ensure that State and 
volunteer assistance funding goes for the most meritorious 
State and local fire department projects. These rural and local 
fire units are extremely important for the Nation's readiness 
and they should be commended for their hard work and success at 
initial attack and shared participation during emergencies. The 
Committee also expects that fire assistance provided through 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency will carefully consider 
the needs and success of rural fire assistance providers.
    The increase above the request for State fire assistance is 
for general program delivery and $1,000,000 is for South Lake 
Tahoe wildfire protection as a grant to the South Lake Tahoe 
Public Utility District. The Committee expects the Forest 
Service to support and expand the Fire Safe Councils in 
California. State fire assistance funds should also be used 
preferentially to support community wildfire protection 
planning and plan implementation.
    Volunteer Fire Assistance.--The Committee has also included 
$12,810,000 for volunteer fire assistance, an increase of 
$5,000,000 above the request and $5,037,000 above the enacted 
level. Use of this increase, as noted above, should be 
coordinated with the Department of the Interior. This brings 
the volunteer fire funding to a total of $18,810,000, including 
funding in State and private forestry.

                  CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $438,334,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       382,601,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       411,025,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -27,309,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +28,424,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:



[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $411,025,000 for capital 
improvement and maintenance, $28,424,000 above the request and 
$27,309,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. The 
Committee directs the Forest Service to display in the budget 
and track Forest Service maintenance funding and capital 
improvement funding as separate budget line items for 
facilities, roads, and trails activities.
    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 Forest 
Service Facility Realignment and Enhancement Act of 2005, and 
the infrastructure improvement funds.
    Facilities Maintenance.--The Committee recommends 
$64,466,000 for facilities maintenance, $5,000,000 below the 
request and $14,294,000 above the fiscal year 2006 level. The 
Committee notes that it has accepted the Forest Service 
recommendation to fund small projects out of maintenance and 
not out of construction; hence the transfer of funds between 
these two accounts. In addition, the Committee notes that it 
has maintained the bill language begun last year allowing 
assessment of programs for maintenance of facilities; this 
limit has been raised to $45,000,000 service-wide.
    Facilities Capital Improvement.--The Committee recommends 
$50,574,000 for facilities capital improvement, $10,100,000 
below the request and $22,952,000 below the fiscal year 2006 
level. Changes to the budget request for projects include the 
following increases: Allegheny NF recreation sites, PA 
($1,900,000); Chattanooga airtanker base completion, TN 
($1,050,000); Cherokee NF recreation sites, TN ($1,100,000); 
Keenwild helibase, CA ($500,000); and National Forests of North 
Carolina recreation sites ($2,500,000). The recommendation does 
not include the $15,144,000 requested for the Forest Products 
Lab, WI, or the funding requested for the SE Alaska discovery 
center, lighting upgrade or the Tenderfoot campground, AK, and 
the R10 building planning and design is reduced by $206,000 for 
a total of $753,000. The Committee needs further justification 
for the Forest Product Lab project and the research mission of 
the Lab before embarking on an endeavor which would cost well 
over $40,000,000.
    The Committee requests that the Forest Service report by 
November 30, 2006 on various options concerning expansion of 
the El Portal rain forest center on the Caribbean NF, PR, so 
the facility or its environs could be expanded to provide 
lodging to expand technology transfer and environmental 
education.
    Road Maintenance.--The Committee recommends $133,244,000 
for road maintenance, $40,457,000 above the request and 
$11,588,000 below the fiscal year 2006 level. The Committee has 
maintained the road decommissioning authority at $15,000,000. 
The Committee notes that at these funding levels, the number of 
failed roads will continue to increase.
    Road Capital Improvement.--The Committee recommends 
$80,000,000 for road capital improvement, $10,000,000 below the 
request and $4,144,000 above the fiscal year 2006 level.
    Trail Maintenance.--The Committee recommends $40,908,000 
for trail maintenance, $5,399,000 above the budget request and 
equal to the fiscal year 2006 level. The Committee 
recommendation includes $1,350,000 for operation of the 
national scenic and historic trails as in the request, and 
provides increases above the budget request of $400,000 for 
operations at the Florida National Scenic Trail, $1,000,000 for 
operations at the Continental Divide National Scenic Trail, 
$75,000 for the Appalachian Trail, $75,000 for the North 
Country Trail, $250,000 for operations at the Pacific Crest 
National Scenic Trail, $400,000 for operations at the Nez Perce 
National Historic 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.
    The Committee expects that the specific increased 
allocations provided for operation of the National scenic and 
historic trails will become part of the base budgets for these 
trails in the forests and the regions which host these 
important resources so that this detailed level of Committee 
oversight will not be required in future years. The Committee 
understands that operation of these trails includes planning, 
NEPA compliance, feasibility studies, archaeological surveys, 
threatened, endangered and sensitive species surveys, 
maintenance, and improvements. The Service should continue to 
report annually its accomplishments for these trails and 
display the funding needed to support them, including the 
amount needed to construct new sections of these trails, in the 
budget justification.
    Trail Capital Improvement.--The Committee recommends 
$32,500,000 for trail capital improvement, $7,668,000 above the 
budget request and $797,000 below the fiscal year 2006 level. 
Within the increase above the request for trails construction, 
the Committee has included: $1,000,000 for construction at the 
Florida National Scenic Trail; $1,500,000 for construction at 
the Continental Divide trail; and $1,000,000 for construction 
at the Pacific Crest National Scenic trail. The Committee 
expects the Forest Service to work diligently at updating 
national forest trail plans in accordance with the November, 
2005 travel management rule.
    Infrastructure Improvement.--The Committee recommends 
$9,333,000 for infrastructure improvement as requested, a 
decrease of $3,140,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.
    Bill Language.--The recommendation includes bill language, 
which transfers $7,400,000 of the $10,000,000 previously 
appropriated (P.L. 108-287, Section 8098b) to build a wildland 
fire training center in the San Bernardino, CA area, to the 
wildland fire management appropriation account for the purpose 
of reducing hazardous fuels on the San Bernardino NF, CA. The 
Committee directs the Forest Service not to reduce the base 
funding for hazardous fuels reduction on this forest because of 
this additional funding being made available.

                            LAND ACQUISITION
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $41,772,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        25,075,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         7,500,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       -34,272,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       -17,575,000
    The Committee recommends $7,500,000 for land acquisition, 
$34,272,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and 
$17,575,000 below the budget request. The total reflects the 
use of prior year funds ($4,000,000) from the La Madera 
property in the Cibola National Forest.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:
      
                          Project                            AmountColumbia River Gorge NSA, OR/WA.......................        $1,000,000
Uwharrie Trail NF, NC.................................           500,000
Wisconsin Wild Waterways, WI..........................         1,500,000
Wayne NF, OH..........................................           500,000
                                                       -----------------
    Subtotal..........................................         3,500,000
Acquisition Management................................         8,000,000
Use of Prior Year Balance.............................        -4,000,000
                                                       -----------------
        Total.........................................        $7,500,000
    Bill Language.--Language is included prohibiting the Forest 
Service from acquiring land for the Homewood Conservation 
Project in Lake Tahoe, California. This language applies to any 
funds available to the Forest Service in this Act, the Santini-
Burton Act, or any other Act.

         ACQUISITION OF LANDS FOR NATIONAL FORESTS SPECIAL ACTS
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $1,053,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         1,053,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         1,053,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $1,053,000 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, 2006...........................          $231,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................           231,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................           231,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $231,000, 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, 2006...........................        $2,920,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         3,932,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         3,932,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +1,012,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $3,932,000, 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, 2006...........................           $63,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................            63,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................            63,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $63,000, 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, 2006...........................        $4,975,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         5,311,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         5,311,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +336,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $5,311,000, the same as the budget 
request and $336,000 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 
included 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 limits funding for the working capital fund 
of the Department of Agriculture to the $73,052,000 requested 
in the budget. The Committee is concerned that the Department 
of Agriculture over-assesses the Forest Service for the 
``greenbook'' charges. The Department should report to the 
Committees on Appropriations specifically what each charge is 
for and how it is calculated; charging solely on an FTE basis 
is insufficient.
    The Committee has amended previous language concerning 
interactions with foreign countries to clarify that the Forest 
Service International Program has the authority to sign 
agreements directly with the U.S. Agency for International 
Development, the Department of State, and natural resource 
institutions around the world to address natural resource 
issues.
    The Committee continues the authority for transfers to the 
National Forest Foundation and the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation; the former at the requested level of $2,500,000 and 
the latter recommendation is $2,250,000, a reduction of 
$400,000 below the requested level. The Committee notes that it 
is acceptable for these foundations to make grants to Federal 
recipients, including Forest Service offices. The Committee 
allows $100,000 in administrative funds to be used by the 
National Forest Foundation, but encourages the Foundation to 
work to be independent of this Federal administrative funding 
support like the National Park and National Fish and Wildlife 
foundations.
    The Committee remains very concerned that once again the 
Forest Service may be taking questionable management steps 
because of a need to accomplish quotas for its competitive 
sourcing program. The Committee notes that its investigations 
staff previously found widespread management lapses which 
required legislative action and notes the recent failure of the 
fleet maintenance contract in California. Public Law 109-54 
Sec. 422(d) requires the Forest Service to report, ``in 
accordance with full cost accounting principles, all costs 
attributable to developing, implementing, supporting, managing, 
monitoring, and reporting on competitive sourcing, including 
personnel, consultant, travel, and training costs associated 
with program management.'' This is apparently not occurring. 
Accordingly, this issue is addressed once again in bill 
language, included under Title IV--General Provisions, limiting 
the use of funds for competitive sourcing efforts and providing 
certain other guidance. Competitive sourcing efforts may 
continue, but the cost is limited to $2,500,000. The Committee 
reiterates that all associated activities related to 
competitive sourcing need to be charged against the funding 
cap. This includes all staff time engaged in feasibility 
studies as well as all staff time spent on training and 
answering data calls related to competitive sourcing tasks.
    The Committee requires information concerning costs 
incurred in the past and planned for the future related to 
competitive sourcing. Therefore, by December 31, 2006, the 
service should report to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations, and the House Agriculture, Resources, and 
Government Reform Committees, explaining the accounting 
procedures which have been implemented to track these costs in 
accordance with full cost accounting principles, and providing 
fiscal year 2005 costs and accounting procedures, expected 
costs for fiscal year 2006, and those presumed under the 
requested budget.
    The Committee is also extremely concerned about the 
continuing reports of problems related to the two large efforts 
to improve administrative functions through detailed and 
expensive business process reengineering of financial services 
and human resources. The Albuquerque Service Center (ASC) 
appears to be a tremendous source of frustration for venders 
and personnel who rely on it for basic financial transactions. 
The true costs of the ASC do not appear to be reflected in 
reports provided to the Administration or the Committee. The 
Forest Service must improve in this area. Before committing 
additional funds to the ASC, the Forest Service should 
demonstrate to the Appropriations Committees and to the public 
that the tasks and plan for its operation are well thought out 
and clear and include specific benchmarks and metrics. 
Therefore, the Committee directs the Forest Service to provide 
quarterly reports on business process reengineering efforts and 
transmit these to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations and post them in an easily found location on the 
agency web-site. 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 understands that the Forest Service is 
considering a long term lease for a large building with 
hundreds of office work stations in Albuquerque, NM, to house 
approximately half of its headquarters personnel. The Committee 
understands that in 2008 the Service will lose its office lease 
in Rosslyn, VA, which currently houses almost half of the 
Washington office staff. The Committee encourages the Forest 
Service to review seriously the costs of such a move and to 
consult with the House Committees on Appropriations, 
Agriculture, and Resources and the Senate Committees on 
Appropriations and Energy and Natural Resources before 
committing to a long term lease. The Service should evaluate 
carefully management, policy, and leadership needs at both the 
national and regional levels. Given the Forest Service budget 
situation, the efficiencies available with modern computing and 
telecommunications devices, and the huge cost of maintaining so 
many regional offices, the Committee suggests that greater 
administrative savings could be achieved from a streamlined 
regional role and structure. Furthermore, the Committee notes 
the large cost overruns which occurred last year and this year 
when the Forest Service paid change of station costs for many 
more personnel than the Service had predicted would move to 
Albuquerque. It seems likely that similar cost overruns would 
occur in 2008 if the Forest Service has to pay for new office 
space at headquarters, or pay extensive relocation or 
termination costs, and also support a large, new facility in 
New Mexico. Such important management decisions, with such 
large cost implications, should have the benefit of open, 
public discussion and Congressional coordination.

                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 33 hospitals, 52 health centers, 2 school health 
centers, and 38 health stations. Tribes and tribal groups, 
through contracts and compacts with the IHS, operate 15 
hospitals, 220 health centers, 9 school health centers, and 260 
health stations (including 162 Alaska Native village clinics). 
The IHS, tribes, and tribal groups also operate 11 regional 
youth substance abuse treatment centers and 2,241 units of 
staff quarters.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................    $2,692,009,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................     2,822,500,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................     2,830,136,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................      +138,037,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        +7,636,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    The Committee recommends $2,830,136,000 for Indian Health 
Services, an increase of $7,636,000 above the budget request 
and $138,037,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. 
Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
    Clinical Services.--The Committee recommends an increase of 
$9,275,000 in hospital and health clinic programs for the 
Indian Health Care Improvement Fund. Direction on the 
distribution of these funds is provided below.
    Urban Indian Health Clinics.--The Committee recommends an 
increase of $32,744,000 to restore funding for the 32 urban 
Indian clinics.
    Fixed Cost Decreases.--The Committee recommends a decrease 
of $34,383,000, which will enable the Service to fund 60 
percent of its fixed cost increases for medical inflation and 
population growth.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. Funds for the Indian Health Care Improvement Fund should 
be distributed using the same methodology as in 2003. Of the 
available funds, 70 percent is for the 28 units funded below 40 
percent of need in 2005 and 30 percent is for the remaining 133 
units funded below 60 percent of need in 2005.
    2. The budget continues funding in the dental program for 
Clinical and Preventive Support Centers. This is a critical 
national effort and the Committee expects the Service to 
continue to manage and fund these programs through IHS 
headquarters. These funds should not be subject to tribal share 
distributions.
    3. The Committee continues to be concerned about the high 
vacancy rates of health care providers at IHS and tribal 
facilities and expects the Service to investigate the 
feasibility of establishing a central credentialing system, 
which would enhance the use of volunteers in fields such as 
dentistry. The Service should report to the Committee by 
February 28, 2006, addressing the feasibility of using the 
Defense Department's credentialing system or developing a 
separate IHS system. The report should specifically address 
streamlining the process for credentialing volunteers, 
including credentialing volunteers to work at multiple sites 
and over multiple years without having to be re-credentialed.
    4. The pharmacist intern program is continued at the fiscal 
year 2006 level. The Committee is pleased with the success of 
this program, which was established with funds recommended by 
the Committee 7 years ago, and notes that the Service has 
retained 90 percent of interns beyond their initial residency 
year.
    5. The Service should use a weighted formula for 
distributing loan repayment funding to address its most 
critical vacancies. As of March 13, 2006, the key categories, 
including the number of vacant positions and the vacancy rate 
by category, were:
          1) Dentistry--116 vacancies--28%;
          2) Podiatry--10 vacancies--25%;
          3) Medical imaging--58 vacancies--20%;
          4) Nursing--738 vacancies--18%;
          5) Therapy--19 positions--17%;
          6) Medical technology--43 vacancies--12%;
          7) Physician--100 vacancies--11%;
          8) Pharmacy--59 vacancies--11%; and
          9) Optometry--17 positions--11%.
    6. The Service should continue and expand its efforts to 
collect reimbursements from private insurance providers, 
including the use of contract bill collectors who provide 
services in exchange for a reasonable percentage of monies 
collected.
    7. The Service should complete its revision of its contract 
support cost policy as soon as possible. The Committee will 
consider providing funding for new and expanded contracts in 
future fiscal years based upon the revised policy.
    8. Funding for the urban health program has been restored 
and the proposal to eliminate this program is rejected. Funding 
for IHS urban clinics is levered with nearly $2 for every $1 
contributed by the Service. The Program Assessment Rating Tool 
score for the program was one point shy of ``moderately 
effective'', which is a score that many of the government 
programs in this bill can only hope to achieve in the future. 
The Committee encourages the Service to work with HHS to help 
these clinics get additional funding through the Community 
Health Centers program and to work with the individual clinics 
on continued improvements in health services delivery.

                        INDIAN HEALTH FACILITIES
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $353,211,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       347,287,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       363,573,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +10,362,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       +16,286,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $363,573,000 for Indian health 
facilities, an increase of $16,286,000 above the budget request 
and $10,362,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level. 
Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
    Health Care Facilities Construction.--The Committee 
recommends an increase of $19,000,000 for health care 
facilities construction, which will continue the construction 
of the Kayenta and San Carlos, AZ clinics and restore partially 
funding for the Services dental facilities program, small 
ambulatory facilities program, and joint ventures program. 
Funding is detailed in the table below.
    Fixed Cost Decreases.--The Committee recommends a decrease 
of $2,714,000, which will enable the Service to fund 60 percent 
of its fixed cost increases for medical inflation and 
population growth.
    The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
health care facilities construction funds:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Committee
              Project                  2007 Request      Recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ambulatory Care Centers:
    Kayenta, AZ Health Center.....                  0         $6,000,000
    Phoenix, AZ SW Health Center..        $17,664,000         17,664,000
    San Carlos, AZ Health Center..                  0          4,000,000
Other Facilities:
    Dental Facilities Program.....                  0          2,000,000
    Joint Ventures................                  0          2,000,000
    Small Ambulatory Facilities...                  0          5,000,000
                                   -------------------------------------
        Total.....................        $17,664,000        $36,664,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The Service needs to do a better job of requesting and 
justifying construction funding for its hospital and clinic 
facility needs. At the level of funding requested in 2007, it 
would take 48 years to complete the facilities on the current 
priority list. There are many facilities that should to be 
added to the list now and, in 48 years, all of the IHS 
facilities will need to be replaced or require major 
renovation. Even when the facilities construction program was 
much more generously funded, it took between 11 and 15 years 
from the time a proposal was received from a tribe until 
construction was completed. At the funding level requested for 
2007, some facilities on the current priority list would wait 
more than 60 years from proposal submission until completion of 
construction and tribal facilities not on the list would wait 
considerably longer than that. Sixty years is beyond the 
reasonable life expectation for a hospital or clinic. 
Currently, about one third of the IHS-operated hospitals and 
health centers are more than 40 years old.
    2. The current IHS maintenance budget is less than half of 
what is required, if you apply commercial sector health care 
standards. Without progress on new and renovated facilities, 
the maintenance backlog will grow at a rapid pace from the 
current backlog level of nearly half a billion dollars.
    3. In determining priorities for project funding under the 
joint ventures program for hospitals and clinics, the Service 
should provide additional credit to tribes that are willing to 
provide full funding for facility equipment in addition to 
providing full funding for facility construction.
    4. Funding for small ambulatory facilities should be used 
to select additional projects from the most recent 
solicitation.
    5. The Service should continue to apply a cap of $2,000,000 
for any single small ambulatory facility project and most, if 
not all projects should be funded substantially below that 
level.
    6. 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.
    7. 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 
(HUD). HUD should provide any needed funds to the IHS for that 
purpose.
    8. 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.

                     National Institutes of Health


          NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES

    The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, an 
agency within the National Institutes of Health, was authorized 
in section 311(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 and in section 126(g) 
of the Superfund amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 to 
conduct certain research and worker training activities 
associated with the nation's Hazardous Substance Superfund 
program.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $79,108,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        78,414,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        79,414,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +306,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        +1,000,000
    The Committee recommends $79,414,000 for the National 
Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, an increase of 
$1,000,000 above the budget request and $306,000 above fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level. The increase above the budget request 
is for individual project grants.
    Bill Language.--The Committee recommends bill language 
providing two-year funding availability for individual project 
grants.
    The Committee encourages the Institute to expand its 
individual project grants over the next 3 years so that a more 
robust program is developed. In 2006, $2,000,000 is being used 
for these grants. The Committee has provided a total of 
$3,000,000 for 2007 and encourages the Institute to provide 
$4,000,000 in 2008 and $5,000,000 in 2009 and subsequent years.

            Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry


            TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC HEALTH

    The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 
(ATSDR), an agency of the Public Health Service, was created in 
section 104(i) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. The ATSDR's primary 
mission is to conduct surveys and screening programs to 
determine relationships between exposure to toxic substances 
and illness. Other activities include the maintenance and 
annual update of a list of hazardous substances most commonly 
found at Superfund sites, the preparation of toxicological 
profiles on each such hazardous substance, consultations on 
health issues relating to exposure to hazardous or toxic 
substances, and the development and implementation of certain 
research activities related to ATSDR's mission.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $74,905,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        75,004,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        76,754,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +1,849,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................        +1,750,000
    The Committee recommends $76,754,000 for toxic substances 
and environmental public health programs, an increase of 
$1,750,000 above the budget request and $1,849,000 above the 
fiscal year 2006 level. The increase above the budget request 
provides funding for 50 percent of the agency's fixed cost 
increases.
    Bill Language.--The Committee recommends bill language 
capping the administrative costs paid to the Centers for 
Disease Control (CDC) at 7.5 percent of the total appropriation 
for the Agency of Toxic Substance and Disease Registry. This 
language was carried in the past (2003 and earlier). 
Administrative charges paid to CDC have nearly doubled since 
the cap was removed in 2004. Over the same period, the agency's 
total budget has declined by 8 percent before considering any 
adjustments for inflation.
    The Committee encourages the ATSDR to continue to support 
the minority health professions community under its cooperative 
agreement activities in fiscal year 2007.

                         OTHER RELATED AGENCIES


                   Executive Office of the President


  COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

    The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) was established 
by Congress under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(NEPA). The Office of Environmental Quality (OEQ), which 
provides professional and administrative staff for the Council, 
was established in the Environmental Quality Improvement Act of 
1970. The Council on Environmental Policy has statutory 
responsibility under NEPA for environmental oversight of all 
Federal agencies and is to lead interagency decision-making of 
all environmental matters.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $2,677,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         2,627,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         2,627,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................           -50,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $2,627,000, the budget request, 
for the Council on Environmental Quality and Office of 
Environmental Quality, a decrease of $50,000 below the fiscal 
year 2006 level.

             Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board was 
authorized by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 to 
investigate accidental releases of certain chemical substances 
resulting in, or that may cause, serious injury, death, 
substantial property damage, or serious adverse effects on 
human health. The Board became operational in fiscal year 1998.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $9,064,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         9,108,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         9,208,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +144,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................          +100,000
    The Committee recommends $9,208,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, 
an increase of $100,000 above the budget request and $144,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 level. The $100,000 increase above 
the budget request is for an annual financial audit.
    Bill Language.--The Committee recommends bill language 
discontinuing the use of the Environmental Protection Agency's 
Inspector General (IG) as the IG for the Chemical Safety and 
Hazard Investigation Board. Language is also recommended 
limiting funding for the Board of Directors to $600,000.

              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.
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $8,474,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         5,940,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         5,940,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        -2,534,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $5,940,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation, 
the same as the budget request and $2,534,000 below the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level.

    Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts 
                              Development


                        PAYMENT TO THE INSTITUTE
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $6,207,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         6,703,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         6,703,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +496,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $6,703,000 for the Institute of 
American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development, 
the same as the budget request and $496,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level.
    The Committee commends the Institute of American Indian and 
Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development (IAIA) for its 
commitment to the preservation and teaching of American Indian 
and Alaska Native arts and culture. However, IAIA has submitted 
a request for matching construction dollars during the budget 
process for the last several years based on its original 
charter. The Institute is not authorized to receive 
construction funding to expand its facilities and therefore the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has denied these requests 
and the Committee fully supports OMB's decision.

                        Smithsonian Institution

    The Smithsonian Institution is the world's largest museum 
and research complex, with 18 museums and galleries, the 
National Zoo, and nine research centers around the world. 
Funded by both private and Federal sources, the Smithsonian is 
unique in the Federal establishment. Created by an act of 
Congress in 1846 to carry out the trust included in James 
Smithson's will, it has been engaged for more than 150 years in 
the ``increase and diffusion of knowledge.'' In 2005, the 
Smithsonian attracted more than 24,000,000 visitors to its 
museums, galleries, and zoological park. Additional millions 
also view Smithsonian traveling exhibitions and participate in 
the annual Folklife Festival on the National Mall. As custodian 
of the National Collections, the Smithsonian is responsible for 
more than 140 million art objects, natural history specimens, 
and artifacts. These scientific and cultural collections are a 
vital resource for global research and conservation efforts. 
The 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.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $516,568,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       537,394,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       517,094,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................       +526,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................       -20,300,000
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $517,094,000 for salaries and 
expenses, an increase of $526,000 above the enacted level 
and $20,300,000 below the budget request. Changes to the request 
include an additional $700,000 for the National Zoological Park 
to provide staffing for the opening of the new Asia I exhibit 
and for enhanced pest control throughout the Zoo, an additional 
$500,000 for Fellowships and an additional $500,000 for 
scientific research equipment. The Committee believes that 
these are higher priorities than providing the requested 
increase of $2,000,000 for transit benefits for employees. 
There is also an undistributed reduction of $5,000,000.
    Bill Language.--The Committee takes seriously the age and 
deteriorating condition of the facilities at the National 
Zoological Park. Bill language is included under salaries and 
expenses setting aside $10,000,000 of the facilities 
maintenance funds for critical backlog maintenance at the 
National Zoological Park for fiscal year 2007. The Committee 
strongly urges the Smithsonian to maintain this level in future 
budgets.
    In addition, the Committee is uncomfortable with the fact 
that decisions on how to allocate facility maintenance funds 
are not detailed in the annual budget justification. While the 
Committee understands the need for flexibility, the Smithsonian 
should, in future requests, include a list of how funds will be 
distributed with justifications. Should funds need to be moved 
during the year, the Smithsonian should notify the Committee in 
writing of any changes on a quarterly basis. Reprogramming 
guidelines should be closely followed.

                           FACILITIES CAPITAL
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $98,529,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       107,000,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       107,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +8,471,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $107,000,000 for facilities 
capital, the same as the budget request and an increase of 
$8,471,000 above the enacted level.
    Bill Language.--The Committee has provided $20,000,000 for 
the National Zoological Park, an increase of $4,000,000 above 
the request. These additional funds should come from the other 
revitalization projects activity. This increase is provided in 
addition to the $1,000,000 in the budget for addressing 
critical infrastructure needs, specifically to provide fire 
detection and suppression systems throughout the Zoo. The 
budget justification and testimony before the Committee 
indicates that ``the current utility and fire-protection 
infrastructure is totally inadequate to meet the needs of the 
Zoo and to protect and support its animals''. The Committee 
strongly urges the Smithsonian to continue to provide 
significant funding in future budgets for revitalization of the 
aging infrastructure at the National Zoological Park. The 
Committee considers development of Asia II as a major part of 
that effort.
    The Committee has provided the full amount for Facilities 
Planning and Design, however, it has not agreed to the list of 
projects. In light of the additional funds provided to the 
Zoological Park, a new list should be forwarded to the 
Committee adjusting for additional long term project planning 
for the Zoo.

           ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS, SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

    The bill includes new language limiting the Smithsonian's 
ability to execute any contract or legal agreement which could 
limit access by the public to the Smithsonian collections. 
Language is also included limiting compensation of Smithsonian 
employees to the rate of pay of the President of the United States.


                        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, 
DC 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, 2006...........................       $95,179,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       101,794,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       101,794,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +6,615,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $101,794,000, the budget request, 
for salaries and expenses of the National Gallery of Art, an 
increase of $6,615,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level.

            REPAIR, RESTORATION AND RENOVATION OF BUILDINGS
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $15,962,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        14,949,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        14,949,000
Comparison:...........................................
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        -1,013,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $14,949,000, the budget request, 
for repair, restoration and renovation of buildings at the 
National Gallery of Art, a decrease of $1,013,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted 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, 2006...........................       $17,538,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        18,909,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        18,909,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +1,371,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $18,909,000 for operations and 
maintenance, the same as the budget request and $1,371,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                              CONSTRUCTION
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $12,809,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        19,800,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        19,800,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +6,991,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $19,800,000 for construction, the 
same as the budget request and $6,991,000 above the fiscal year 
2006 enacted level.
    The Committee notes that the Kennedy Center has responded 
to the directives and recommendations in the Government 
Accountability Office report in a very positive manner. Given 
the very tight fiscal budget situation, it is imperative that 
the Kennedy Center manage federal funds in a cost effective 
manner and avoid the cost overruns experienced in the past. The 
Committee continues to urge the Center to use the Smithsonian 
Inspector General for oversight.

            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, 2006...........................        $9,065,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         9,438,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         9,438,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +373,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $9,438,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for 
Scholars as requested, an increase of $373,000 above the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level. The Committee notes the useful and 
successful oversight hearing held earlier this year, and 
commends the Center for its important contributions to American 
society.

           National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities


                    National Endowment for the Arts


                       GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $124,406,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       124,412,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       124,412,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................            +6,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with 
estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $124,412,000 for the National 
Endowment for the Arts, the same as the budget request and 
$6,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                 National Endowment for the Humanities


                       GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................      $125,728,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................       126,049,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................       126,049,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +321,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The Committee recommends $126,049,000 for grants and 
administration, the same as the budget request and $321,000 
above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

                            MATCHING GRANTS
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $15,221,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        14,906,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        14,906,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          -315,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $14,906,000 for matching grants, 
the same as the budget request and $315,000 below the fiscal 
year 2006 level.

                       Administrative Provisions

    The Committee has retained the administrative provision 
proposed by the Administration's 2007 fiscal year budget 
request for the National Foundation on the Arts and the 
Humanities including the proviso that exempts grants and 
contracts solely funded by non-appropriated funds from matching 
funding requirements.

                        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, 2006...........................        $1,865,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         1,951,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         1,951,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................           +86,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $1,951,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Commission of Fine Arts, as requested, an 
increase of $86,000 over the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and 
the same as the budget request.

               NATIONAL CAPITAL ARTS AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................        $7,143,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         6,534,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         6,534,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          -609,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The National Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs program was 
established in Public Law 99-190 to support artistic and 
cultural programs in the Nation's Capital. The Committee 
recommends $6,534,000, a decrease of $609,000 below the fiscal 
year 2006 enacted level and the same as the budget request.

               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, 2006...........................        $4,789,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         5,118,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         5,118,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          +329,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $5,118,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, an 
increase of $329,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted level 
and the same as the budget request.

                  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, 2006...........................        $8,123,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................         8,265,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................         7,623,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          -500,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................          -642,000
    The Committee recommends $7,623,000, for salaries and 
expenses of the National Capital Planning Commission, a 
decrease of $500,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level 
and $642,000 below the budget request.

                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, 2006...........................       $42,150,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        43,786,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        43,415,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................        +1,265,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................          -371,000
    The Committee recommends $43,415,000 for the Holocaust 
Memorial Museum, a decrease of $371,000 below the budget 
request and $1,265,000 above the fiscal year 2006 enacted 
level. This increase is 3.0% above the enacted funding level.

                             Presidio Trust


                          PRESIDIO TRUST FUND
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................       $19,706,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................        19,256,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................        19,256,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................          -450,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The Committee recommends $19,256,000 for the Presidio Trust 
Fund, the same as the budget request and $450,000 below the 
fiscal year 2006 enacted level.

      White House Commission on the National Moment of Remembrance


                          SALARIES AND EXPENSES
 Appropriation enacted, 2006...........................          $247,000
Budget estimate, 2007.................................           200,000
Recommended, 2007.....................................           200,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2006...............................           -47,000
    Budget estimate, 2007.............................                 0
    The White House Commission on the National Moment of 
Remembrance, established by Public Law 106-579, was created to 
(1) sustain the American spirit through acts of remembrance, 
not only on Memorial Day, but throughout the year; (2) 
institutionalize the National Moment of Remembrance; and (3) to 
enhance the commemoration and understanding of Memorial Day. 
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $200,000, a 
decrease of $47,000 below the fiscal year 2006 enacted level 
and the same as the budget request.

                      TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Section 401 continues a provision providing for public 
availability of information on consulting services contracts.
    Section 402 continues a provision prohibiting activities to 
promote public support or opposition to legislative proposals.
    Section 403 continues a provision providing for annual 
appropriations unless expressly provided otherwise in this Act.
    Section 404 continues a provision limiting the use of 
personal cooks, chauffeurs or servants.
    Section 405 provides for restrictions on departmental 
assessments unless approved by the Committees on 
Appropriations.
    Section 406 prohibits the transfer of funds unless provided 
in this or other Acts.
    Section 407 continues a provision limiting the sale of 
giant sequoia.
    Section 408 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 409 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 410 continues a limitation on completing and 
issuing the five-year program under the Forest and Rangeland 
Renewable Resources Planning Act.
    Section 411 continues a provision permitting the Forest 
Service to use the roads and trails fund for backlog 
maintenance and priority forest health treatments.
    Section 412 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 413 continues a provision clarifying the Forest 
Service land management planning revision requirements.
    Section 414 continues a provision limiting preleasing, 
leasing, and related activities within the boundaries of 
National monuments.
    Section 415 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 416 continues a provision authorizing 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 417 continues a provision limiting 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 418 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 problems 
associated with the previous, faulty competitive sourcing 
studies are not repeated in the future.
    Section 419 prohibits the expenditure of funds on Safecom 
and Disaster Management.
    Section 420 amends the Interior and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, 2000, to extend an authority concerning 
Forest Service administration of rights-of-way and land uses.
    Section 421 allows the Secretary of Agriculture to complete 
an exchange of a leasehold interest at the San Bernardino 
International Airport for lands and buildings located adjacent 
to the former Norton Air Force Base in California. This 
exchange will allow the Secretary to relocate the forest 
supervisor's office of the San Bernardino National Forest into 
buildings owned by the United States, which will result in 
lease cost savings and improved service to the public.
    Section 422 prohibits the use of funds in this Act for 
competitive sourcing studies by the Department of the Interior 
and the Forest Service for activities relating to wildfire 
management or wildfire suppression programs.
    Section 423 requires that before funding in this Act can be 
used to support the work on the Fire Program Analysis (FPA) 
system, the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the 
Interior must certify, in writing, that the FPA system will 
accomplish the existing work plan for the system, as determined 
by the Wildland Fire Leadership Council, and that State 
wildfire agencies will be full participants in the use of the 
system.
    Section 424 limits compensation of Smithsonian employees to 
the rate of pay of the President of the United Sates.
    Section 425 expresses the sense of the Congress with respect 
to greenhouse gas emissions control.

                             TITLE V-SUSPENSION OF ROYALTY RELIEF

    Title V provides direction to the Secretary of the Interior 
on suspension of royalty relief for oil and gas production on 
Federal lands.


                              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
                  Department and activity                recommended for
                                                           rescissionDepartment of the Interior: Land and Water                   $30,000,000
 Conservation Fund (contract authority)...............
Environmental Protection Agency: State and Tribal             indefinite
 Assistance Grants....................................
                           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
   Account from which transfer is to be made        Amount                   be made                  Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land          $9,000,000  Department of Agriculture,            $9,000,000
 Management, Wildland Fire Management.                           Forest Service, Wildland Fire
                                                                 Management.
Department of the Interior, Indian Land and            200,000  Department of the Interior,              200,000
 Water Claim Settlements and Miscellaneous                       Bureau of Land Management,
 Payments to Indians.                                            Management of Lands and
                                                                 Resources.
Environmental Protection Agency, Hazardous          13,316,000  Office of Inspector General.....      13,316,000
 Substance Superfund.
Environmental Protection Agency, Hazardous          30,011,000  Science and Technology..........      30,011,000
 Substance Superfund.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,           9,000,000  Department of the Interior,            9,000,000
 Wildland Fire Management.                                       Bureau of Land Management,
                                                                 Wildland Fire Management.
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service,           7,400,000  Department of Agriculture,             7,400,000
 Capital Improvement and Maintenance.                            Forest Service, Wildland Fire
                                                                 Management.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 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 includes the following changes in application of 
existing law:

                              OVERALL BILL

    1. Providing that certain appropriations remain available 
until expended or extends the availability of funds beyond the 
fiscal year where programs or projects are continuing but for 
which legislation does not specifically authorize such extended 
availability. This authority tends to result in savings by 
preventing the practice of committing funds on low priority 
projects at the end of the fiscal year to avoid losing the 
funds.
    2. Limiting, in certain instances, 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.
    3. Limiting official entertainment or reception and 
representation expenses for selected agencies in the bill.
    4. Continuing ongoing activities of those Federal agencies, 
which require annual authorization or additional legislation, 
which has not been enacted.

                  TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


                       BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

                   MANAGEMENT OF LANDS AND RESOURCES

    5. Providing funds to the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation under certain conditions.
    6. Permitting the use of fees from communication site 
rentals.
    7. Permitting the collection of fees for processing mining 
applications and for certain public land uses.
    8. Permitting the use of mining fee collections for program 
operations.
    9. Providing for a Youth Conservation Corps.

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

    10. Permitting the repayments of funds transferred from 
other accounts for firefighting.
    11. Permitting the use of funds for lodging and subsistence 
of firefighters.
    12. Permitting the use of grants, contracts and cooperative 
agreements for hazardous fuels reduction, including cost-
sharing and local assistance.
    13. Permitting reimbursement to the Fish and Wildlife 
Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service for 
consultation activities under the Endangered Species Act.
    14. Permitting the use of firefighting funds for the 
leasing of properties or the construction of facilities.
    15. Providing for the transfer of funds between the 
Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture.
    16. Providing funds for support of Federal emergency 
response actions.

                   OREGON AND CALIFORNIA GRANT LANDS

    17. Authorizing the transfer of collections from the Oregon 
and California Land Grants Fund to the Treasury.

               FOREST ECOSYSTEMS HEALTH AND RECOVERY FUND

    18. Permitting the use of salvage timber receipts in the 
forest ecosystems health and recovery fund.

               SERVICE CHARGES, DEPOSITS, AND FORFEITURES

    19. Allowing the use of service charges, deposits and 
forfeitures funds on any damaged public lands.
    20. Authorizing the Secretary to use monies from 
forfeitures, compromises or settlements for improvement, 
protection and rehabilitation of public lands under certain 
conditions.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    21. Permitting the payment of rewards for information on 
violations of law on Bureau lands
    22. Providing for cost-sharing arrangements for printing 
services.
    23. Amending 30 U.S.C. 28 making a minor technical change 
to mining law to clarify the time of day annual work on claims 
must be registered and extending the existing mine claim 
maintenance fee authority.
    24. Permitting the use of refunds and rebates from an 
information technology vendor.

                United States Fish and Wildlife Service 


                          RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

    25. 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.
    26. Providing for a Youth Conservation Corps.
    27. Limiting funding for certain Endangered Species Act 
listing programs.
    28. Permitting payment for information or rewards in the 
law enforcement program.
    29. Earmarking funds for contaminant analysis.

                            LAND ACQUISITION

    30. Limiting the use of funds for administrative overhead, 
planning, and other management costs.

                      LANDOWNER INCENTIVE PROGRAM

    31. Providing matching landowner incentive grants to States 
and territories.

                   PRIVATE STEWARDSHIP GRANTS PROGRAM

    32. Providing private stewardship grants for private 
conservation efforts.

                      STATE TRIBAL WILDLIFE GRANTS

    33. Specifying the State and Tribal Wildlife grants 
distribution formula, the planning and cost-sharing 
requirements, requiring that funds unobligated after two years 
be reapportioned, and limiting administrative costs.
    34. Providing that no State, Territory, or other 
jurisdiction shall receive a grant if its conservation plan is 
disapproved.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    35. Limiting the purchase of motor vehicles.
    36. Providing for repair of damage to public roads.
    37. Providing options for the purchase of land not to 
exceed $1.
    38. Permitting cost-shared arrangements for printing 
services.
    39. Permitting the use of funds for employment related 
legal services.
    40. Permitting the acceptance of donated aircraft.
    41. Limiting the use of funds for establishing new refuges.

                         National Park Service 


                 OPERATION OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM

    42. Allowing road maintenance service to trucking permitees 
on a reimbursable basis. This provision has been included in 
annual appropriations Acts since 1954.
    43. Providing for a Youth Conservation Corps program.
    44. Restricting the use of funds for the United States Park 
Police.
    45. Providing that funds may be spent without regard to the 
``no net loss'' law enforcement policy.

                  NATIONAL RECREATION AND PRESERVATION

    46. Limiting the use of cooperative agreements and any form 
of cash grant for the rivers, trail, and conservation 
assistance program.

                       HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND

    47. Providing grants for Save America's Treasures and 
Preserve America to be matched by non-Federal funds, that 
individual projects are only eligible for one grant and are 
subject to consultation, and that funds for Federal projects 
are available by transfer to individual agencies.

                              CONSTRUCTION

    48. Limiting funds for Park Service Partnership projects 
with certain exceptions.
    49. Limiting donation or services associated with new 
facilities.
    50. Providing funds for modified water deliveries to 
Everglades National Park with certain restrictions.
    51. Permitting the issuance of procurements for the full 
scope of projects for the National Mall and other historical 
sites.

                    LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND

    52. Rescinding $30,000,000 in land and water conservation 
fund contract authority.

                 LAND ACQUISITION AND STATE ASSISTANCE

    53. Prohibiting the use of funds to establish a contingency 
fund.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    54. Preventing the implementation of an agreement for the 
redevelopment of the southern end of Ellis Island.
    55. Providing for a grant to the Washington Tennis and 
Education Foundation.
    56. Limiting the use of funds for the United Nation's 
Biodiversity Convention.
    57. Permitting the use of funds for workplace safety needs.
    58. Allowing the Secretary of the Interior to appeal value 
determinations.
    59. Allowing certain franchise fees to be available for 
expenditure without further appropriation to extinguish or 
reduce liability for certain possessory interests.

                    United States Geological Survey 


                 SURVEYS, INVESTIGATIONS, AND RESEARCH

    60. Providing for two-year availability of funds for 
biological research and for the operations of cooperative 
research units.
    61. Prohibiting the conduct of new surveys on private 
property without permission.
    62. Requiring cost sharing for cooperative topographic 
mapping and water resource data collection activities.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    63. Permitting the use of certain contracts, grants, and 
cooperative agreements.
    64. Recognizing students and recent graduates as Federal 
employees for the purposes of travel and work injury 
compensation.

                      Minerals Management Service 


                ROYALTY AND OFFSHORE MINERALS MANAGEMENT

    65. Requiring the continued operation of the Mid-Continent Mapping 
Center in Rolla, MO.
    66. Permitting the use of excess receipts from Outer 
Continental Shelf leasing activities.
    67. Providing no year funding availability for computer 
acquisitions.
    68. Providing for reasonable expenses related to volunteer 
beach and marine cleanup activities.
    69. Providing for refunds for overpayments on Indian 
allottee leases.
    70. Permitting the use of receipts for administration of 
the Coastal Impact Assistance Program.

         Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 


                       REGULATION AND TECHNOLOGY

    71. Permitting the use of monies collected pursuant to 
assessment of civil penalties to reclaim lands affected by coal 
mining after August 3, 1977.
    72. Permitting payment to State and tribal personnel for 
travel and per diem expenses for training.

                    ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION FUND

    73. Earmarking Abandoned Mine Reclamation funds for acid 
mine drainage.
    74. Limiting grants to minimum program States.
    75. Allowing the use of debt recovery to pay for debt 
collection.
    76. Reallocating amounts in the Abandoned Mine Land 
Reclamation fund dedicated to the rural program (collected 
under section 402(g)(2) of the Surface Mining Control and 
Reclamation Act of 1977), to the federal share portion of the 
fund (section 402(g)(3)).
    77. Allowing funds to be used for travel expenses while 
attending training.

                        ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

    78. Permits the Secretary to transfer title for computer 
equipment to States and Tribes.

                        Bureau of Indian Affairs


                      OPERATION OF INDIAN PROGRAMS

    79. Limiting funds for welfare assistance payments, except 
for disaster relief.
    80. Limiting funds for contract support costs and for 
administrative cost grants for schools.
    81. Permitting the use of tribal priority allocations for 
general assistance payments to individuals, for contract 
support costs, and school operations costs.
    82. Providing for an Indian self-determination fund.
    83. Allowing the transfer of certain forestry funds.

                              CONSTRUCTION

    84. Providing for the transfer of Navajo irrigation project 
funds to the Bureau of Reclamation.
    85. Providing that six percent of Federal Highway Trust 
Fund contract authority may be used for construction management 
costs.
    86. Providing Safety of Dams funds on a nonreimbursable 
basis.
    87. Requiring the use of administrative and cost accounting 
principles for certain school construction projects and 
exempting such projects from certain requirements.
    88. Requiring conformance with building codes and health 
and safety standards and allowing the Secretary to assume 
control of a construction project under certain conditions.
    89. Specifying the procedure for dispute resolution.
    90. Allowing reimbursement of construction costs from the 
Office of Special Trustee.

                   MISCELLANEOUS PAYMENTS TO INDIANS

    91. Permitting payment for the Quinault Indian Nation 
boundary settlement.
    92. Providing funding for the Snake River Water Rights Act 
of 2004, including funding for habitat restoration by the State 
of Idaho and transfer of funds to the Bureau of Land Management 
for mitigation of land transfers.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    93. Allowing contracting for the San Carlos Irrigation 
Project.
    94. Limiting use of funds for passenger motor vehicles.
    95. Limiting the use of funds for contracts, grants and 
cooperative agreements.
    96. Allowing tribes to return appropriated funds for 
distribution to other tribes.
    97. Prohibiting funding of Alaska schools.
    98. Limiting the number of schools and the expansion of 
grade levels in individual schools.
    99. Permitting the use of Indian Student Equalization 
Program funds to offset costs associated with significant 
enrollment increases.
    100. Specifying distribution of indirect and administrative 
costs for certain Tribes.

                          Departmental Offices


               INSULAR AFFAIRS, ASSISTANCE TO TERRITORIES

    101. Earmarking funds for various programs and for salaries 
and expenses for the Office of Insular Affairs and providing 
two year funding availability for the latter.
    102. Requiring audits of the financial transactions of the 
Territorial governments by the GAO.
    103. Providing grant funding under certain terms of the 
Agreement of the Special Representatives on Future United 
States Financial Assistance for the Northern Mariana Islands.
    104. Allowing grants for the Pacific Basin Development 
Council.
    105. Providing a grant to the Close Up foundation.
    106. Providing for capital infrastructure in various 
Territories.
    107. Allowing appropriations for disaster assistance to be 
used as non-Federal matching funds for hazard mitigation 
grants.

             DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT, SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    108. Deriving funds for appraisal services and Take Pride 
in America activities from Land and Water Conservation Fund.
    109. Permitting payments to former Bureau of Mines workers.
    110. Limiting the establishment of additional reserves in 
the working capital fund.

                       PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES

    111. Excluding any payment pursuant to the Payments in Lieu 
of Taxes that is less than $100.

             Office of Special Trustee for American Indians


                         FEDERAL TRUST PROGRAMS

    112. Limiting the amount of funding available for the 
historical accounting of Indian trust fund accounts.
    113. Allowing transfers to other Department of the Interior 
accounts.
    114. Specifying that the statute of limitations shall not 
commence on any claim resulting from trust funds losses.
    115. Exempting quarterly statements for Indian trust 
accounts $15 or less.
    116. Requiring annual statements and records maintenance 
for Indian trust accounts.
    117. Limiting use of funds to correct administrative errors 
in Indian trust accounts.
    118. Permitting the use of recoveries from erroneous 
payments pursuant to Indian trust accounts.

                       INDIAN LAND CONSOLIDATION

    119. Permitting transfers of funds to the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs and Departmental Management accounts from Indian land 
consolidation for administrative expenses.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    120. Allowing the sale of existing aircraft with proceeds 
used to offset the purchase price of replacement aircraft.
    121. Prohibiting the use of working capital or consolidated 
working funds to augment certain offices.
    122. Requiring description of working capital fund charges 
in annual budget justifications.
    123. Requiring Committee approval of departures from 
Working Capital Fund estimates.
    124. Requiring reports on National Business Center 
activities.

             General Provisions, Department of the Interior

    125. Allowing transfer of funds in certain emergency 
situations and requiring replacement with a supplemental 
appropriation request.
    126. Permitting the Department to use limited funding for 
certain services.
    127. Restricting various oil 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 areas, Eastern 
Gulf of Mexico planning area, North Aleutian Basin planning 
area, Northern, Southern and Central California planning areas, 
and Washington/Oregon planning area.
    128. Permitting the transfer of funds between the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee for American 
Indians.
    129. Permitting the redistribution of certain Indian funds 
with limitations.
    130. Permitting the conveyance of the Twin Cities Research 
Center.
    131. Allowing the use of helicopters and motor vehicles on 
Sheldon and Hart National Wildlife Refuges.
    132. Authorizing funding transfers for Shenandoah Valley 
Battlefield NHD and Ice Age NST.
    133. Prohibiting the closure of the underground lunchroom 
at Carlsbad Caverns NP.
    134. Prohibiting demolition of the bridge between New 
Jersey and Ellis Island.
    135. Limiting compensation for the Special Master and Court 
Monitor for the Cobell v. Norton litigation.
    136. Allowing payment of attorney fees for Federal 
employees related to the Cobell v. Norton litigation.
    137. Requiring the Fish and Wildlife Service to mark 
hatchery salmon.
    138. Addressing the use of certain Indian lands for gaming 
purposes.
    139. Preventing funds to study or reduce the water level at 
Lake Powell.
    140. Limiting the amount of fees that may be collected by 
the National Indian Gaming Commission.
    141. Providing for a tribal trust demonstration program.
    142. Providing for the renewal of certain grazing permits 
in the Jarbidge Field office of the Bureau of Land Management.
    143. Authorizing the acquisition of lands and leases for 
Ellis Island.
    144. Permitting the Secretary of the Interior to issue 
grazing permits within the Mojave National Preserve.
    145. Implementing rules concerning winter snowmobile use at 
Yellowstone National Park.
    146. Limiting the use of funds for Centers of Excellence 
and Partnership Skills Bank Training.

                TITLE II_ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY


                         Science and Technology

    147. Limiting certain per diem rates and certain other 
operating expenses.

                 Environmental Programs and Management

    148. Limiting certain per diem rates, other operating 
expenses, official representation and reception expenses and 
providing two year funding availability for administrative 
costs of Brownfields program.

                     Hazardous Substance Superfund

    149. Limiting construction and repair expenses.
    150. Providing for the allocation of funds to other Federal 
agencies under certain circumstances.
    151. Providing for the transfer of funds within certain 
agency accounts.

                      Office of Inspector General

    152. Limiting construction and repair expenses.
    153. Providing that, in fiscal year 2007 and thereafter, 
the Inspector General shall not serve as Inspector General for 
the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.

                Leaking underground Storage Tank Program

    154. Limiting construction and repair expenses.

                   State and Tribal Assistance Grants

    155. Permitting the use of limited State Revolving Funds 
for decentralized projects.
    156. Earmarking funds for the Clean Water and Drinking 
Water State Revolving Funds for grants to United States-Mexico 
border programs, Alaska for water and wastewater infrastructure 
needs.
    157. Earmarking funds for water and wastewater 
infrastructure improvements with a minimum of 45% cost-share 
per project.
    158. Earmarking funds for Brownfields grants, diesel 
grants, and categorical grants to States.
    159. Earmarking grants for water quality monitoring, 
leaking underground storage tans and competitive targeted 
watershed grants.
    160. Providing waivers for certain uses of State water 
pollution control State revolving funds for grants to 
Federally-recognized Indian Tribes, and for the cap on grants 
at the discretion of the Administrator.
    161. Prohibiting the use of funds for jurisdictions that 
permit development or construction of addition colonial areas.
    162. Making a technical correction to the 2005 
appropriations for special project funding.
    163. Providing for the transfer of special project funds, 
unawarded after 7 years, to the appropriate State Revolving 
Funds.

                       Administrative Provisions

    164. Allowing awards of grants to federally-recognized 
Indian tribes.
    165. Authorizing the collection of pesticide registration 
service fees.
    166. Limiting the use of funds for consultants.
    167. Requiring EPA to finalize a rule incorporating 
financial incentives for States that implement adequate 
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System fee programs.

           General Provision, Environmental Protection Agency

    168. Prohibiting the use of funds in contravention of 
executive order 12898 and 15 U.S.C. 2862(c)(3).

                       TITLE III_RELATED AGENCIES


                             Forest Service


                     FOREST AND RANGELAND RESEARCH

    169. Earmarking funds for the forest inventory and analysis 
program.

                       STATE AND PRIVATE FORESTRY

    170. Deriving forest legacy funding from the Land and Water 
Conservation Fund.
    171. Requiring notification to the House and Senate 
Appropriations Committee before releasing forest legacy project 
funds.

                         NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM

    172. Allowing 50 percent of the fees collected under the 
Land and Water Conservation Fund Act to remain available until 
expended.
    173. Requiring the budget justification to display 
unobligated balances available at the start of fiscal year.

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

    174. Allowing the use of wildland fire funds to repay 
advances from other accounts.
    175. Allowing reimbursement of States for certain wildfire 
emergency activities.
    176. Requiring 50 percent of any unobligated balances 
remaining at the end of the fiscal year, except hazardous fuels 
funding, to be transferred to the Knutson-Vandenberg Fund as 
repayment for past advances.
    177. Permitting the use of funds for the joint fire science 
program.
    178. Permitting the use of forest and rangeland research 
funds for fire science research.
    179. Permitting the use of funds for emergency 
rehabilitation and restoration and hazardous fuels reduction to 
support emergency response and wildfire suppression.
    180. Earmarking funds for hazardous fuels reduction, 
rehabilitation, restoration, and research and permitting 
competitive research grants.
    181. Earmarking funds for State fire assistance, volunteer 
fire assistance and forest health on Federal and State and 
private lands.
    182. Permitting funding transfers with Committee approval 
in certain cases.
    183. Providing for cost-shared cooperative agreements.
    184. Providing for the use of funds on adjacent, non-
Federal lands for hazard reduction.
    185. Providing for the use of hazardous fuels reduction 
funds to create incentives for increased use of biomass on 
National Forest lands.
    186. Providing that funds for wildfire suppression shall be 
assessed for indirect costs.
    187. Providing for the transfer of wildland fire funds 
between the Department of the Interior and the Department of 
Agriculture.

                  CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE

    188. Allowing capital improvement and maintenance funds to 
be used for road decommissioning.
    189. Requiring that no road decommissioning be funded until 
notice and an opportunity for public comment has been provided.

                         RANGE BETTERMENT FUND

    190. Providing that six percent of range betterment funds 
may be used for administrative expenses.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    191. Permitting the purchase of passenger motor vehicles.
    192. Providing that proceeds from the sale of aircraft may 
be used to purchase replacement aircraft.
    193. Allowing funds for certain employment contracts.
    194. Allowing funds to be used for purchase and alteration 
of buildings.
    195. Allowing for acquisition of certain lands and 
interests.
    196. Allowing expenses for certain volunteer activities.
    197. Providing for the cost of uniforms.
    198. Providing for debt collections on certain contracts.
    199. Permitting the transfer of funds for emergency 
firefighting from other forest service accounts under certain 
circumstances.
    200. Providing that the first transfer of funds for 
emergency firefighting shall include land acquisition and 
forest legacy funds.
    201. Allowing funds to be used through the Agency for 
International Development for work in foreign countries and to 
support other forestry activities outside of the United States.
    202. Prohibiting the transfer of funds under the Department 
of Agriculture transfer authority under certain conditions.
    203. Prohibiting reprogramming of funds without approval.
    204. Limiting funds to be transferred to the USDA Working 
Capital Fund.
    205. Providing for a Youth Conservation Corps program.
    206. Limiting the use of funds for official reception and 
representation expenses.
    207. Providing for matching funds and administrative 
expenses for the National Forest Foundation and matching funds 
for the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.
    208. Permitting the use of funds for payments to counties 
in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area.
    209. Limiting reimbursements to the Office of General 
Counsel for travel and related expenses and requiring the 
display of such transfers in the budget request.
    210. Allowing the limited use of funds for law enforcement 
emergencies.
    211. Providing Federal employee status for certain 
individuals employed under the Older American Act of 1965.
    212. Permitting funding assessments for facilities 
maintenance, rent, utilities, and other support services.

                         Indian Health Service


                         INDIAN HEALTH SERVICES

    213. Providing that Tribal contract and grant funding is 
deemed obligated at the time of grant or contract award and 
remains available until expended.
    214. Limiting funds for catastrophic care and loan 
repayment and providing no year availability for loan repayment 
funds.
    215. Providing that certain contracts and grants may be 
performed in two fiscal years.
    216. Permitting the use of Indian Health Care Improvement 
Fund monies for facilities improvement and providing no year 
funding availability.
    217. Providing no year funding availability for scholarship 
funds.
    218. Exempting certain Tribal funding from fiscal year 
constraints.
    219. Limiting contract support cost spending.
    220. Providing for use of collections and reporting of 
collections under Title IV of the Indian Health Care 
Improvement Act.
    221. Providing for the collection of individually 
identifiable health information relating to the Americans with 
Disabilities Act by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

                        INDIAN HEALTH FACILITIES

    222. Providing that facilities funds may be used to 
purchase land, modular buildings and trailers.
    223. Providing for TRANSAM equipment to be purchased from 
the Department of Defense.
    224. Prohibiting the use of funds for sanitation facilities 
for new homes funded by the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development.
    225. Allowing for the purchase of ambulances.
    226. Providing for a demolition fund.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    227. Providing for payments for telephone service in 
private residences in the field, purchase of motor vehicles, 
aircraft and reprints.
    228. Providing for purchase and erection of modular 
buildings.
    229. Providing funds for uniforms.
    230. Allowing funding for attendance at professional 
meetings.
    231. Providing that health care may be extended to non-
Indians at Indian Health Service facilities, subject to 
charges, and for the use of those funds.
    232. Permitting the use of funds transferred from the 
Department of Health and Human Services.
    233. Prohibiting limitations on certain federal travel and 
transportation.
    234. Prohibiting personnel ceilings assessments by the 
Department of Health and Human Services.
    235. Allowing deobligation and reobligation of funds 
applied to self-governance funding agreements.
    236. Prohibiting the expenditure of funds to implement new 
eligibility regulations.
    237. Permitting certain reimbursements and the use of those 
funds.
    238. Providing that reimbursements for training provide 
total costs.
    239. Prohibiting changing the appropriations structure 
without approval of the Appropriations Committees.

                     National Institutes of Health


          NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES

    240. Earmarking funds for individual project grants and 
providing two year funding availability.

            Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry


            TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC HEALTH

    241. Earmarking funds for Individual Learning Accounts and 
providing no year funding availability.
    242. Providing for the conduct of health studies, testing, 
and monitoring.
    243. Providing deadlines for health assessments and 
studies.
    244. Limiting administrative costs paid to the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention.
    245. Limiting the number of toxicological profiles.

                   Executive Office of the President


  COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

    246. Authorizing the appointment and duties of the 
chairman.

             Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    247. Limiting the use of funds for per diem expenses and 
the number of senior level positions.
    248. Providing that in fiscal year 2007 and thereafter the 
EPA, Inspector General shall not serve as Inspector General for 
the Board.

              Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    249. Defining eligible relocatees.
    250. Prohibiting movement of any single Navajo or Navajo 
family unless a new or replacement home is available.
    251. Limiting relocatees to one new or replacement home.
    252. 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.

                        Smithsonian Institution


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    253. Limiting lease terms.
    254. Providing for purchase of passenger vehicles and 
certain rental, repair and cleaning of uniforms.
    255. Earmarking funds for facilities maintenance at the Zoo 
and for certain programs at the National Museum of African 
American History and Culture and repatriation of skeletal 
remains and providing no year funding availability.
    256. Earmarking funds for fellowships and scholarly awards 
and providing two year funding availability.
    257. Providing that funds may be used to support American 
Overseas Research Centers and earmarking $125,000 for the 
Council of Overseas Research Centers.
    258. Allowing for advance payments to independent 
contractors performing research services or participating in 
official Smithsonian presentations.

                           FACILITIES CAPITAL

    259. Earmarking funds for maintenance, repair, 
rehabilitation, and construction at the Zoo and for consultant 
services.
    260. Permitting the Smithsonian Institution to select 
contractors for certain purposes on the basis of contractor 
qualifications as well as price.

           ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS, SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

    261. Precluding any changes to the Smithsonian science 
program without prior approval of the Board of Regents.
    262. Limiting the design or expansion of current space or 
facilities without consultation with the Committees.
    263. Limiting the use of funds for the Holt House.
    264. Limiting reprogramming of funds.
    265. Prohibiting purchase of buildings without prior 
consultation.
    266. Limiting the use of funds for contracts and agreements 
with for-profit entities.

                        National Gallery of Art


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    267. Limiting  the compensation of Smithsonian employees.
    268. Allowing payment in advance for membership in library, 
museum, and art associations or societies.
    269. Providing for restoration and repair of works of art 
by contract without advertising.
    270. Providing no-year availability of funds for special 
exhibitions.

            REPAIR, RESTORATION, AND RENOVATION OF BUILDINGS

    271. 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.
    272. Permitting the Gallery to issue a single procurement 
for the full scope of the Work Area #3 contract.

           National Endowment for the Arts and the Humanities


       NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS, GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION

    273. Permitting transfer of funds within certain accounts 
and requiring funds to be expensed in accordance with Public 
Law 108-108.

         NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES, MATCHING GRANTS

    274. Allowing obligation of National Endowment for the 
Humanities current and prior year funds from gifts, bequests, 
and devises of money for which equal amounts have not 
previously been appropriated.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    275. Prohibiting the use of funds for grants and contracts 
which do not include the text of 18 U.S.C. 1913.
    276. Prohibiting the use of appropriated funds and 
permitting the use of nonappropriated funds for reception 
expenses.
    277. Allowing the chairperson of the National Endowment for 
the Arts to approve small grants under certain circumstances.
    278. Specifying that grants and contracts supported 
entirely with nonappropriated funds are not subject to matching 
requirements.

                        Commission of Fine Arts


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    279. Permitting the charging and use of fees for its 
publications.

               Advisory Council on Historic Preservation


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    280. Restricting hiring at Executive Level V or higher.

                  National Capital Planning Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    281. Permitting limited use of funds for official reception 
and representation expenses.

                United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

    282. Earmarking funds for equipment replacement and for 
repair, rehabilitation and for exhibition design and production 
and providing no year availability for these funds.

                      TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    283. Providing for public availability of information on 
consulting services contracts.
    284. Prohibiting the use of funds to distribute literature 
either to promote or oppose legislative proposals on which 
Congressional action is incomplete.
    285. Specifying that funds are for one year unless provided 
otherwise.
    286. Prohibiting the use of funds to provide personal 
cooks, chauffeurs or other personal servants to any office or 
employee.
    287. Limiting assessments against programs funded in this 
bill.
    288. Limiting transfer of funds.
    289. Prohibiting the sale of giant sequoia trees in a 
manner different from 2005.
    290. 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.
    291. Limiting the use of funds for contract support costs 
on Indian contracts.
    292. Making reforms in the National Endowment for the Arts, 
including funding distribution reforms.
    293. Limiting funds for completing or issuing the five-year 
program under the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources 
Planning Act.
    294. Limiting the use of telephone answering machines.
    295. Clarifying the Forest Service land management planning 
revision requirements.
    296. Limiting leasing and preleasing activities within 
National Monuments.
    297. 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.
    298. Permitting consideration, when awarding contracts, to 
local contractors who provide employment and training for 
dislocated and displaced workers in economically disadvantaged 
rural communities.
    299. Providing certain limitation of funds for Federal land 
takings excluding those under the Everglades National Park 
Protection and Expansion Act.
    300. Limiting the use of funds for competitive sourcing 
studies.
    301. Prohibiting use of funds for certain government-wide 
activities.
    302. Enhancing forest service administration of rights-of-
way and land uses (Public Law 106-113).
    303. Providing for the exchange of lands in San Bernardino, 
California, to relocate the forest supervisor's office.
    304. Limiting competitive sourcing studies related to 
wildfire management or wildfire suppression.
    305. Limiting contracting for the fire programs analysis 
system unless the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture 
certify the program is on track.
    306. Limiting the compensation of Smithsonian employees.
    307. Expressing the sense of the Congress on greenhouse gas 
emissions control.

                  TITLE V-SUSPENSION OF ROYALTY RELIEF

    308. Providing direction to the Secretary of the Interior 
on royalty relief suspension for oil and gas leases.

                  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 in
                                           Last year of    Authorization       last year of    Appropriations in
                                          authorization        level          authorization        this bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bureau of Land Management:
    All discretionary programs..........        2002             Such sums         $1,681,437         $1,785,347
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service:
    Resource Management:
        Endangered Species Act                  1992               $41,500             35,721            146,610
         Amendments of 1988.............
        Great Lakes Fish & Wildlife             2004                 4,000                498                500
         Restoration Grants.............
        Marine Mammal Protection Act            1999                10,296              2,008              4,443
         Amendments of 1994.............
    General Administration:
        Great Ape Conservation..........        2005                 5,000              1,381              1,290
        Fisheries Restoration Irrigation        2005                25,000              2,000              4,000
         Mitigation Act.................
        Neotropical Migratory Birds.....        2005                 5,000              3,944              4,000
U.S. Geological Survey:
    National Geologic Mapping Reauthorization
      Act of 1999.......................        2005                64,000             25,162             25,447
    Water Resources Research Act of 1984.       2005                12,000              6,409              6,404
Environmental Protection Agency:
    Hazardous Substance Superfund.......        1994             5,100,000          1,480,853          1,256,855
    State and Tribal Assistance Grants:
        Alaska Native Villages..........        1979                 2,000      Not available             14,850
        Clean Water SRF.................        1992             1,800,000          2,400,000            687,555
        Drinking Water SRF..............        2003             1,000,000  .................            841,500
        Clean Air Act...................        1997             Such sums            167,230            231,220
        Radon Abatement Act.............        1991                10,000              9,000              8,074
        Clean Water Act (FWPCA).........        1991     .................  .................            457,761
        BEACH Act.......................        2005                30,000              9,920              9,900
        Safe Drinking Water Act.........        2003               115,000  .................            114,939
        Solid Waste Disposal Act (RCRA).        1988                70,000             71,391            103,345
        Toxic Substances Control Act....        1983                 1,500              5,100             18,661
        Pollution Prevention Act........        1993                 8,000              6,800              5,940
        Indian Environmental General            1998             Such sums             38,585             56,925
         Assistance Program Act.........
        LUST Trust Fund.................        1988                10,000             14,400             17,567
National Endowment for the Arts.........        1993             Such sums            174,460            124,412
National Endowment for the Humanities...        1993             Such sums            177,403            140,955
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation       2005                 5,000              4,860              5,118
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee notes that authorizing legislation for many 
of these programs is in various stages of the legislative 
process and expects these authorizations 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:






                  Compliance With Rule XIII--Clause 3

    In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):
      
    Section 28 of title 30 U.S.C. is amended as follows:
      
    Sec. 28. The miners of each mining district may make 
regulations not in conflict with the laws of the United States, 
or with the laws of the State or Territory in which the 
district is situated, governing the location, manner of 
recording, amount of work necessary to hold possession of a 
mining claim, subject to the following requirements: The 
location must be distinctly marked on the ground so that its 
boundaries can be readily traced. * * * The period within which 
the work required to be done annually on all unpatented mineral 
claims located since May 10, 1872, including such claims in the 
Territory of Alaska, [shall commence at 12 o'clock meridian on 
the 1st day of September] shall commence at 12:00 ante meridian 
on the 1st day of September succeeding the date of location of 
such claim.
      
    Section 28f(a) of title 30 U.S.C. is amended as follows:
      
    (a) Claim Maintenance Fee.--The holder of each unpatented 
mining claim, mill, or tunnel site, located pursuant to the 
mining laws of the United States, whether located before, on or 
after August 10, 1993, shall pay to the Secretary of the 
Interior, on or before September 1 of each year[for years 2004 
through 2008], a claim maintenance fee of $100 per claim or 
site (!1) Such claim maintenance fee shall be in lieu of the 
assessment work requirement contained in the Mining Law of 1872 
(30 U.S.C. 28-28e) (!2) and the related filing requirements 
contained in section 1744(a) and (c) of title 43.
      
    Section 28g of title 30 U.S.C. is amended as follows:
      
    Sec. 28g. Location fee.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for every 
unpatented mining claim, mill or tunnel site located after 
August 10, 1993, [and before September 30, 2008,] pursuant to 
the Mining Laws of the United States, the locator shall, at the 
time the location notice is recorded with the Bureau of Land 
Management, pay to the Secretary of the Interior a location 
fee, in addition to the claim maintenance fee required by 
section 28f of this title, of $25.00 per claim.

                    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) .....................  25,889
Outlays:
    Fiscal year 2007..................................  16,291
    Fiscal year 2008..................................   5,356
    Fiscal year 2009..................................   2,337
    Fiscal year 2010..................................   1,222
    Fiscal year 2011..................................     481


               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..................................   5,511
Fiscal year 2007 outlays resulting therefrom..........   2,284



 ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF THE HONORABLE DAVID OBEY

    The Minority cannot fault the fairness of the process followed
  by our Committee in producing the fiscal year 2007 Interior 
  Appropriations bill. Minority Members were consulted 
  throughout the process and the bill reflects our input in a 
  number of important areas. But a fair process by itself does 
  not produce an acceptable product. The bill's principal 
  responsibility is to provide for the environmental and 
  conservation needs of America's people and its natural 
  resources. The bill as reported simply does not fulfill that 
  responsibility. Because of this failure, America's water and 
  air will be dirtier, its pristine natural landscapes and 
  historic structures will be less protected, and visitors to 
  its national parks, refuges and forests will experience 
  declining levels of service.
    The Interior bill's failings did not occur by accident. The 
  overall lack of funds to address national needs is the direct 
  result of a Republican fiscal plan for 2007 that values tax 
  cuts for the most well-off over critical priorities like 
  protecting the environment. This Republican plan provides 
  $9.4 billion less for domestic programs than the amount 
  necessary just to maintain current service levels and the 
  2007 Interior bill now presented to the House reflects the 
  damage which is the inevitable result.
    The $25.9 billion allocated for Interior and Environment 
  programs in this bill is $145 million below the FY 2006  
  enacted level and roughly $800 million below the level 
  necessary to maintain current services for programs under 
  this Subcommittee's jurisdiction. The result is significant
  and damaging reductions in many conservation and 
  environmental programs and in service programs for Native 
  Americans. members should be aware of the most critical 
  reductions when they review the bill's impact on their 
  communities and their constituents. For example:
    In most cases the Subcommittee has only been 
  able to fund 70 percent of increases mandated by law for 
  federal pay and   for other fixed costs for the federal 
  agencies which manage our national parks, refuges, and 
  forests. As the recent GAO report on the nation's 
  national parks made clear, this inevitably will mean 
  cutbacks in staff and cutbacks in visitor services for 
  people who visit our parks and other federal facilities.
    Despite facility maintenance backlogs of at 
  least $12 billion in our parks, refuges and forests, 
  funding for construction projects throughout the bill 
  are cut by $216 million below last year and more than 
  $400 million below the level six years ago. There is 
  no funding at all for new schools on Indian reservations. 
  The cutbacks in construction funding are shown on the 
  following table:

                                          CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY TABLE

                                             [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   FY 2007     FY 2007    Committee v.  Committee v. Committee v.
                              FY 2001   FY 2006   President   Committee     Pres.         FY06         FY 2001
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLM ............................    17        12          6          11             5            -1           -6
USFWS...........................    89        75         20          40            20           -35          -49
NPS.............................   300       333        229         230             1          -103          -70
BIA.............................   357       272        215         216             1           -56         -141
IHS.............................    85        38         18          37            19            -1          -48
USFS............................   521       431        383         411            28           -20         -110
                                 _______________________________________________________________________________
    Total, construction......... 1,369     1,161        871         945            74          -216         -424
                                                                                                          (-31%)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

   Funding for the Clean Water Revolving Fund is cut 
by another $200 million below the 2006 level. Over the last 
three years the Clean Water program, which EPA sites as on of 
its most effective programs, has been reduced by $662 million 
or nearly 50 percent. This means either essential 
infrastructure repairs for this country's aging water 
infrastructure will not occur or local water and sewer rates 
will increase as communities pick up the federal share of 
these costs.
   Other state grant programs broadly supported in 
the House are cut below the current rate. This includes a 
$4 million cut in PILT, as well as significant reductions 
in wildlife grants and the North American Wetlands 
programs. Stateside conservation grants are completely 
eliminated. Over the last 5 years assistance to states for 
environmental or conservation purposes have been reduced 
by more than $750 million as shown below:

                                         STATE GRANTS SUMMARY TABLE

                                             [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   FY 2007     FY 2007    Committee v.  Committee v. Committee v.
                              FY 2001   FY 2006   President   Committee     Pres.         FY06         FY 2001
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clean Water SRF................. 1,350       887        688         688   ...........          -199         -662
LWCF "Stateside"................    90        28          0           0   ...........           -28          -90
North Am. Wetlands Conservation.    40        39         42          37            -5            -3           -3
State Wildlife Grants...........    75        67         75          50           -25           -17          -25
PILT............................   215       232        198         228            30            -4           13
Landowner Incentives............     0        24         24          15            -9            -9           15
    Total, state grants......... 1,770     1,277      1,027       1,018            -9          -259         -752
                                                                                                          (-42%)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

   Funding for federal land acquisition and to help                     
States preserve open spaces is cut by $98 million in this 
bill and by more than $400 million since 2001. Funding in
this area has been cut by more than 80 percent in the last
four years as follows:

                                    LAND ACQUISITION/CONSERVATION HISTORY TABLE

                                             [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   FY 2007     FY 2007    Chairman v.   Chairman v.  Chairman v. 
        Land acquisition      FY 2001   FY 2006   President   Chairman      Pres.         FY06         FY 2001
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLM ............................    47         9          9           3            -6            -6          -44
USFWS...........................   121        28         27          20            -7            -8         -101
NPS.............................   125        34         23          28             5            -6          -97
USFS............................   151        42         25           8           -17           -34         -143
                                 _______________________________________________________________________________
    Subtotal, land acq..........   444       113         84          59           -25           -54         -385
Forest Legacy...................    60        57         61          13           -48           -44          -47
                                 _______________________________________________________________________________
    Total, land conservation....   504       170        145          72           -73           -98         -432
                                                                                                          (-86%)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________         




  During consideration of the bill in Committee, the Minority 
offered an amendment to add $800 million to the bill to 
address its most critical failings. The amendment was part of 
a fiscally disciplined, balanced Democratic approach that 
would return Congressional budgeting to the principle of 
"paying-as-you-go," providing additional funding for key 
domestic investments and reducing the deficit by scaling back 
supersized tax cuts for those making more than $1 million per 
year. The amendment would have reduced their tax savings from 
$114,000 per year to approximately $112,000. Unfortunately 
this amendment was rejected on a party line vote. The failure 
of the Majority to adopt this responsible amendment is 
particularly ironic given that the same day the Majority 
pushed legislation through the House that provides high 
income taxpayers additional tax cuts of $42,000 while families 
with incomes of $50,000 per year would only get on average a 
$46 tax cut.
  While these fiscal failings are very troubling to the 
Minority, we were pleased that the full Committee did approve 
the addition to the bill of an important Sense of the Congress 
Resolution regarding global climate change. This resolution 
states, in summary, that global climate change is real; that 
human activity is an important causal agent of this change; 
and, importantly, that mandatory controls on greenhouse gases 
will be necessary to address the problem. This important 
statement of principles is the first step towards real action 
on climate change by the Congress. We urge the full House to 
also endorse it when the bill is considered on the Floor.
  In summary, despite an open and fair process, a faulty 
economic policy from the President and the Republican Majority 
has left the Congress in the position of not having enough 
money to fulfill our fundamental stewardship responsibilities 
for the environment and our public lands. This did not happen 
by accident. A decision was made to starve domestic government 
and we are now paying the price.