Report text available as:

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


109th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     109-80
======================================================================
 
     DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES 
                        APPROPRIATION BILL, 2006

                                _______
                                

  May 13, 2005.--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. 2361]

    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, 2006. 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
        U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.....................    10
                                                                     21
        National Park Service..............................    19
                                                                     33
        U.S. Geological Survey.............................    26
                                                                     49
        Minerals Management Service........................    29
                                                                     54
        Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 
            Enforcement....................................    31
                                                                     58
        Bureau of Indian Affairs...........................    34
                                                                     63
        Departmental Offices...............................    42
                                                                     73
        Department of the Interior General Provisions......    50
                                                                     85
Title II--Environmental Protection Agency:
        Science and Technology.............................    63
                                                                     88
        Environmental Programs Management..................    64
                                                                     95
        Office of Inspector General........................    64
                                                                    106
        Buildings and Facilities...........................    65
                                                                    109
        Hazardous Substance Superfund......................    65
                                                                    111
        Leaking Underground Storage Tanks..................    66
                                                                    117
        Oil Spill Response.................................    66
                                                                    119
        State and Tribal Assistance Grants.................    66
                                                                    121
Title III--Related Agencies:
        Forest Service, USDA...............................    74
                                                                    127
        Indian Health Service, DHHS........................    87
                                                                    152
        National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences    95
                                                                    157
        Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry...    96
                                                                    158
        Council on Environmental Quality and Office of 
            Environmental Quality..........................    97
                                                                    158
        Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board.....    98
                                                                    159
        Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation........    99
                                                                    159
        Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native 
            Culture and Arts Development...................   100
                                                                    160
        Smithsonian Institution............................   100
                                                                    160
        National Gallery of Art............................   103
                                                                    162
        John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.....   105
                                                                    165
        Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars...   105
                                                                    167
        National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities.   106
                                                                    168
        Commission of Fine Arts............................   108
                                                                    172
        Advisory Council on Historic Preservation..........   109
                                                                    172
        National Capital Planning Commission...............   109
                                                                    173
        United States Holocaust Memorial Museum............   109
                                                                    173
        Presidio Trust.....................................   110
                                                                    174
        White House Commission on the National Moment of 
            Remembrance....................................   110
                                                                    174
Title IV--General Provisions...............................   110
                                                                    174

                   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............................           26,107               54           26,107               54
Outlays.....................................           27,500               60           27,496               60
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          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 2006. The hearings are 
contained in 9 published volumes totaling nearly 10,000 pages.
    During the course of the hearings, testimony was taken at 
10 hearings on 8 days, not only from agencies which come under 
the jurisdiction of the Interior Subcommittee, but also, in 
written form, from Members of Congress, State and local 
government officials, and private citizens.
    The bill that is recommended for fiscal year 2006 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 2006   fiscal year 2006   budget estimates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title I, Department of the Interior: New Budget             $9,792,069,000     $9,808,693,000       +$16,624,000
 (obligational) authority..............................
Title II, Environmental Protection Agency: New Budget        7,520,600,000      7,708,027,000       +187,427,000
 (obligational) authority..............................
Title III, related agencies: New Budget (obligational)       8,411,659,000      8,642,405,000       +230,746,000
 authority.............................................
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Grand total, New Budget (obligational) authority.     25,724,328,000     26,159,125,000       +434,797,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 2005, these activities are 
estimated to total $3,568,891,000. The estimate for fiscal year 
2006 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 2005 and 2006.

  DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, AND RELATED AGENCIES TOTAL BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR
                                             FISCAL YEARS 2005-2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Item                            Fiscal year 2005   Fiscal year 2006        Change
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interior, Environment, and related agencies                $26,982,234,000    $26,159,125,000      -$823,109,000
 appropriations bill...................................
Permanent appropriations, Federal funds................      2,985,066,000      3,047,966,000        +62,900,000
Permanent appropriations, trust funds..................        583,825,000        610,944,000        +27,119,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total budget authority...........................     30,551,125,000     29,818,035,000       -733,090,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 Revenue Generated by Agencies in Bill

    The following tabulation indicates total new obligational 
authority to date for fiscal years 2004 and 2005, and the 
amount recommended in the bill for fiscal year 2006. It 
compares receipts generated by activities in this bill on an 
actual basis for fiscal year 2004 and on an estimated basis for 
fiscal years 2005 and 2006. The programs in this bill are 
estimated to generate $13.9 billion in revenues for the Federal 
Government in fiscal year 2006. Therefore, the expenditures in 
this bill will contribute to economic stability rather than 
inflation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Fiscal year--
                          Item                          --------------------------------------------------------
                                                                2004               2005               2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New obligational authority.............................    $27,316,209,000    $26,982,234,000    $26,159,125,000
Receipts:
    Department of the Interior.........................      9,643,359,000     12,497,212,000     13,418,547,000
    Forest Service.....................................        445,533,000        439,106,000        447,050,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total receipts...................................     10,088,892,000     12,936,318,000     13,865,597,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   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 
2006, is defined by the Committee as follows:
    As provided for by section 256(1)(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 2006.
    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 
fiscal year 2006. This is an increase of $108 million above the 
budget request and an increase of $108 million above the amount 
appropriated for fiscal year 2005. Spending for Indian services 
by the Federal Government in total is included in the following 
table.

                          GOVERNMENT-WIDE FEDERAL FUNDING FOR NATIVE AMERICAN PROGRAMS
                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             FY 2004       FY 2005       FY 2006    Change  from
                                                             actual        enacted      Pres. bud       FY05
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Agriculture...............................       798,812       877,371       899,771        22,400
Army Corps of Engineers.................................        34,490        41,376        22,829       -18,547
Department of Commerce..................................        20,945        21,668        20,657        -1,011
Department of Defense...................................        18,000        18,000             0       -18,000
Department of Education.................................     2,438,510     2,524,650     2,550,101        25,451
Department of Health & Human Services...................     4,263,144     4,359,999     4,456,322        96,323
Department of Housing & Urban Development...............       733,085       650,970       590,796       -60,174
Department of the Interior..............................     2,887,399     3,030,079     2,984,840       -45,239
Department of Justice...................................       234,594       232,016       245,185        13,169
Department of Labor.....................................        69,602        69,032        68,488          -544
Department of Transportation............................       274,861       329,491       329,581            90
Department of Veterans Affairs..........................           571           567           580            13
Environmental Protection Agency.........................       243,895       239,004       205,560       -33,443
Small Business Administration...........................         1,979           987             0          -987
Smithsonian Institution.................................        51,630        45,925        45,792          -133
Department of the Treasury..............................         4,000         4,000             0        -4,000
Other Agencies & Independent Agencies...................        96,924       101,594        39,582       -62,012
                                                         -------------------------------------------------------
      Grand Total.......................................    12,172,441    12,546,729    12,460,084       -86,644
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        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 
add an exception for certain Environmental Protection Agency 
grants (section 3(b)) and to delete certain instructions to the 
Forest Service dealing with boundary adjustments and transfer 
of funds.
    The following are the procedures governing reprogramming 
actions for programs and activities funded in the Interior, 
Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act:
    1. Definition.--``Reprogramming,'' as defined in these 
procedures, includes the reallocation of funds from one budget 
activity to another. In cases where either 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.
    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 
such changes, proposals shall be submitted in advance to the 
Committee, regardless of amounts involved, and be fully 
explained and justified.
    (d) Reprogramming proposals submitted to the Committee for 
approval shall be considered approved 30 calendar days after 
receipt if the Committee has 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 Committee 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, Operations 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 six 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 Committee 
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.
    4. Quarterly Reports.--(a) All reprogrammings shall be 
reported to the Committee quarterly and shall include 
cumulative totals. (b) Any significant shifts of funding among 
object classifications also should be reported to the 
Committee.
    5. Administrative Overhead Accounts.--For all 
appropriations where costs of overhead 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 Committee expects a full 
explanation, separate from the justifications. The explanation 
shall show the amount of the assessment, the activities 
assessed, and the purpose of the fund. The Committee expects 
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. Declarations of Taking.--The Committee directs the 
Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
the National Park Service, and the Forest Service to seek 
Committee approval in advance of filing declarations of taking.
    8. 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.
    9. 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 on Appropriations and are approved by such 
Committees, in compliance with these procedures.
    10. Land Acquisitions and Forest Legacy.--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 on Appropriations 
for approval in compliance with these procedures.
    11. 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 on 
Appropriations have had a 30-day period in which to examine the 
proposed exchange.
    12. Appropriations Structure.--The appropriation structure 
for any agency shall not be altered without advance approval of 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.

                          Funding Fixed Costs

    The Committee commends the Administration for funding the 
full amount for anticipated pay cost and fixed cost increases 
for most bureaus and programs. The Committee has been concerned 
that the base operational capability of the programs funded in 
this bill has been declining due to unmet pay and fixed costs. 
The Committee urges the Administration to continue to include 
full uncontrollable costs in future budget submissions.

              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 2006 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 (6) 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.
    Reductions to programs in Indian Country, including 
education grants, welfare programs, 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 2006. We must 
maintain our commitments to American Indian and Alaska Natives 
and critically needed education and health programs are central 
to our ability to meet those commitments.
    Wildfire management efforts and forest health programs are 
some of the most critically important core programs on which 
the Committee has focused scarce resources. The Committee 
recommendation increases funding for wildland fire management 
by $351 million above the request and $146 million above the 
fiscal year 2005 enacted level, including a total of $492 
million for hazardous fuels reduction. In addition, the 
Committee has maintained funding for critical and essential 
forest health management programs and for national fire plan 
support. Without these funds, we will not be able to protect 
communities and natural resources and we will have ever-
increasing wildfire suppression costs in the future and the 
number and severity of large fire events will grow.
    The Committee believes strongly that the agencies funded in 
the Interior and Related Agencies bill need to more effectively 
manage the funds they have. Travel costs need to be closely 
monitored and controlled. The number, size, and cost of 
government-sponsored conferences also should be reduced.
    The Committee expects the Departments and agencies funded 
in this bill to make maximum use of low cost airfares, 
consistent with General Services Administration guidelines. The 
GSA permits the use of lower fares, available to the general 
public, offered by non-contract carriers, if such use will 
result in a lower total trip cost. Consistent with GSA 
guidelines, the Committee expects each Department and agency to 
determine if such lower fares are available and, if so, those 
lower fares should be used unless the contract carrier that 
would have otherwise been used will provide a comparable fare. 
This direction applies to all official travel funded in this 
bill.
    Major new construction projects should not be initiated at 
the expense of critical operations and maintenance 
requirements. Likewise, no new construction project should be 
initiated without a thorough analysis of the future staffing, 
operations, and maintenance costs that will result, and the 
Committee should be consulted at the earliest possible stage 
when a major construction project is under consideration. This 
has been a particular problem in the National Park Service.
    The Committee appreciates the need for information 
technology improvements, enterprise services networks, and 
implementing portions of the President's management agenda. 
However, to date, a lot of funding has been dedicated to these 
initiatives without a well thought-out and reasonable approach 
to addressing requirements. Commercially available systems, 
through the private sector, should be used to the maximum 
extent possible rather than building customized new systems. 
Likewise, the Committee does not endorse the practice of 
assessing costs against programs to build bigger administrative 
bureaucracies in response to new administrative and technology 
requirements or the practice of reducing program budgets on the 
basis of presumed future savings. These costs should be clearly 
justified and requested under administrative accounts and any 
future savings associated with administrative improvements 
should be demonstrated before budget reductions are proposed. 
While portions of the Administration's management agenda may 
indeed be useful, funds should not be taken from all agencies 
to provide centralized funding for the various lead agencies. 
If funding is needed for government wide initiatives, it should 
be requested and managed by each lead agency.
    The Committee has made difficult choices in formulating its 
fiscal year 2006 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

    The Committee has been unable to provide funds for the 
Cooperative Conservation Initiative challenge cost share 
program because of severe fiscal constraints. However, the 
Committee remains supportive of the concept and has continued 
the traditional agency challenge cost share program. The 
Committee has no objection to broadening the scope of the 
ongoing program to encompass resource protection activities.

                       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 $12.2 
million in fiscal year 2006, the same as the estimate for 
fiscal year 2005 and actual receipts of $11.8 million in fiscal 
year 2004. The Bureau also administers about 55 million acres 
of commercial forests and woodlands through the ``Management of 
Lands and Resources'' and ``Oregon and California Grant Lands'' 
appropriations. Timber receipts (including salvage) are 
estimated to be $55.4 million in fiscal year 2006 compared to 
estimated receipts of $33.0 million in fiscal year 2005 and 
actual receipts of $13.5 million in fiscal year 2004. 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, 2005...........................      $836,826,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       850,177,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       845,783,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +8,957,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        -4,394,000


    The Committee recommends $845,783,000 for management of 
lands and resources, $4,394,000 below the budget request and 
$8,957,000 above the fiscal year 2005 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 $189,919,000 for 
land resources, $2,956,000 above the budget request and 
$1,905,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Changes 
from the budget request include increases of $1,000,000 for the 
San Pedro Partnership and $1,100,000 for Santa Ana River 
conservation and land management programs, $156,000 for 
accelerated soil surveys in Wyoming, $1,000,000 for the Idaho 
strategic plan for noxious weed control, and a decrease of 
$300,000 for rangeland restoration.
    The increase provided for the Upper San Pedro Partnership 
shall be used only for water conservation and retention 
projects within the Upper San Pedro river region.
    Wildlife and Fisheries.--The Committee recommends 
$41,048,000 for wildlife and fisheries, the same as the budget 
request and $4,137,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted 
level.
    Threatened and Endangered Species.--The Committee 
recommends $21,572,000 for threatened and endangered species, 
the same as the budget request and $428,000 above the fiscal 
year 2005 enacted level.
    Recreation Management.--The Committee recommends 
$64,604,000 for recreation management, $1,000,000 above the 
budget request and $5,015,000 above the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level. The change from the budget request is an 
increase of $1,000,000 for the San Jacinto and Santa Rosa 
National Monument plan implementation.
    The managers urge the Bureau to comply with the provisions 
of the Steens Act and allow landowner, lessee and inholder 
access to their property within the boundary of the Steens 
Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area. Unless 
funding is provided for land acquisition or exchanges, 
landowners should be afforded full access to their property.
    Energy and Minerals.--The Committee recommends $110,069,000 
for energy and minerals including Alaska minerals, $2,000,000 
above the budget request and $494,000 above the fiscal year 
2005 enacted level. The change from the budget request is an 
increase of $2,000,000 for oil and gas management.
    The Committee believes that U.S. oil shale development is 
an important domestic energy resource. This energy source has 
the potential to help reduce America's growing dependence on 
foreign oil imports, provided that such oil shale development, 
for both research and development as well as large scale 
commercial projects, is conducted in an environmentally 
acceptable and economically feasible manner. The Committee 
directs the Bureau to report by December 31, 2005, on the 
administrative, regulatory, and statutory steps that may be 
necessary to proceed with oil shale development, including, but 
not limited to, acreage limitations on leases and permitting 
measures needed to stimulate oil shale research and commercial 
development.
    Realty and Ownership Management.--The Committee recommends 
$81,146,000 for realty and ownership management, the same as 
the budget request and $11,478,000 below the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level.
    Resource Protection and Maintenance.--The Committee 
recommends $85,866,000 for resource protection and maintenance, 
$2,250,000 above the budget request and $4,365,000 above the 
fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Changes from the request 
include increases of $1,250,000 for the law enforcement 
initiative and $1,000,000 for California desert conservation 
area plans. The increase for law enforcement activities should 
be directed to increasing law enforcement presence on the 
Southwestern border in New Mexico, Arizona, and California.
    Transportation and Facilities Maintenance.--The Committee 
recommends $76,291,000 for transportation and facilities 
maintenance, the same as the budget request and $1,522,000 
below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
    Land and Resource Information Systems.--The Committee 
recommends $18,217,000 for land and resource information 
systems, the same as the budget request and $155,000 above the 
fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
    Mining Law Administration.--The Committee recommends 
$32,696,000 for mining law administration. Offsetting fees are 
equal to the amount made available to support this activity.
    Workforce and Organizational Support.--The Committee 
recommends $147,619,000 for workforce and organizational 
support, the same as the budget request and $5,458,000 above 
the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
    Challenge Cost Share.--The Committee recommends $7,396,000 
for the Bureau's traditional challenge cost share program, 
$12,600,000 below the budget request and the same as the fiscal 
year 2005 enacted level.
    Bill Language.--Language is included in Title IV--General 
Provisions concerning e government initiatives, competitive 
sourcing studies and the Service First initiative.

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $831,295,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       756,564,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       761,564,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -69,731,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        +5,000,000


    The Committee recommends $761,564,000 for wildland fire 
management, $5,000,000 above the budget request and $69,731,000 
below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. When adjusted for 
emergency appropriations there is an increase of $28,880,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:


    The appropriation includes $272,852,000 for preparedness, 
$234,167,000 for fire suppression operations, $211,220,000 for 
hazardous fuels reduction, $24,476,000 for burned area 
rehabilitation, $5,000,000 for rural fire assistance, 
$7,849,000 for deferred maintenance and capital improvement and 
$6,000,000 for the joint fire science program.
    The Committee has provided the requested funds for the 
hazardous fuels program but wants to ensure that these funds 
are used to address the Nation's highest priority fuels 
projects. The Committee continues to stress that the Department 
should be coordinating hazardous fuels activities with the 
Department of Agriculture, State fire agencies and community 
wildfire protection plans.
    The Committee does not approve the new budget alignment 
within wildland fire management. Including joint fire science 
and facilities activities in the preparedness budget 
artificially inflates the preparedness budget and makes it 
difficult to compare to previous readiness levels. The 
Committee sees no compelling reason to include any other 
activities in the preparedness or suppression budgets.
    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 has partially restored the rural fire 
assistance program. The Administration's rationale for the 
reduction was that similar funding was available within the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for rural fire 
assistance. The Committee is skeptical that the Department of 
the Interior will receive commensurate funding from FEMA and 
will be able retain the same flexibility in directing the 
funding to the highest priority needs. The Committee directs 
the Department to report, no later than December 31, 2005, with 
detailed information on how the FEMA funding will be received 
and allocated.
    Bill Language.--Language is included under the wildland 
fire management account allowing the Secretary of the Interior 
and the Secretary of Agriculture to transfer not more than 
$9,000,000 between the two Departments for wildland fire 
management programs and projects. Language is also included 
allowing the use of wildfire suppression funds in support of 
Federal emergency response actions.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $11,340,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         6,476,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        11,476,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +136,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        +5,000,000


    The Committee recommends $11,476,000 for construction, 
$5,000,000 above the budget request and $136,000 above the 2005 
enacted level. The increase above the budget request is to 
address high priority deferred maintenance construction 
projects that improve recreation facilities and public access.

                            LAND ACQUISITION




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $11,192,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        13,350,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         3,817,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        -7,375,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        -9,533,000


    The Committee recommends $3,817,000 for land acquisition, a 
decrease of $9,533,000 below the budget request and $7,375,000 
below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. This amount includes 
$1,500,000 for emergencies and hardships, and $2,317,000 for 
acquisition management.

                   OREGON AND CALIFORNIA GRANT LANDS




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $107,497,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       110,070,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       110,070,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +2,573,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $110,070,000 for the Oregon and 
California grant lands, the same as the budget request and 
$2,573,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.

                           RANGE IMPROVEMENTS




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $10,000,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        10,000,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        10,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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

               SERVICE CHARGES, DEPOSITS AND FORFEITURES

    The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation 
estimated to be $32,940,000, the budget request, for service 
charges, deposits, and forfeitures. This appropriation is 
offset with fees collected under specified sections of the 
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 and other Acts 
to pay for reasonable administrative and other costs in 
connection with rights-of-way applications from the private 
sector, miscellaneous cost-recoverable realty cases, timber 
contract expenses, repair of damaged lands, the adopt-a-horse 
program, and the provision of copies of official public land 
documents.

                       MISCELLANEOUS TRUST FUNDS




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $12,405,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        12,405,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        12,405,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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

                United States Fish and Wildlife Service

    The mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is to 
conserve, protect and enhance fish and wildlife and their 
habitats for the continuing benefit of people. The Service has 
responsibility for migratory birds, threatened and endangered 
species, certain marine mammals, and land under Service 
control.
    The Service manages nearly 96 million acres across the 
United States, encompassing a 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.

                           RESOURCE MANAGEMENT




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $962,940,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       985,563,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................     1,005,225,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       +42,285,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +19,662,000


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


    The Committee recommends $1,005,225,000 for resource 
management, an increase of $42,285,000 above the budget request 
and $19,662,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level. Changes to 
the budget request are detailed below.
    Ecological Services.--The Committee recommends $260,893,000 
for ecological services, an increase of $10,320,000 above the 
budget request.
    Increases for endangered species candidate conservation 
programs include $300,000 for Idaho sage grouse and $300,000 
for the Fisher (Martes pennanti).
    Increases for recovery programs include $1,000,000 to 
restore the Platte River recovery program, $1,500,000 for wolf 
monitoring in Idaho, $200,000 for the Gabbro soils inventory in 
California, $2,000,000 for Pacific salmon grants to be 
administered through the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, 
$700,000 to restore funding for the Upper Colorado River 
recovery program, $500,000 for Florida manatee protection and 
recovery, and $300,000 for Northern Aplomado falcon recovery 
efforts through the Peregrine Fund.
    For the Partners for Fish and Wildlife program, there is a 
decrease of $4,000,000 to the proposed program expansion of the 
Upper Klamath Basin restoration program, and increases of 
$1,400,000 for Washington regional fisheries enhancement 
groups, $700,000 for environmental data quality and access for 
the Washington salmon recovery effort, $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 fish passage in the 
west branch of the Susquehanna River, $500,000 for Georgia 
streambank restoration, $500,000 for nutria eradication at the 
Blackwater NWR, MD, $500,000 for Susquehanna River headwaters 
multiple use wetlands, and $500,000 for a 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 initiative, $100,000 to continue operations at the 
Cedar City, UT ecological services office, and $170,000 to 
restore the base program.
    In coastal programs there are increases of $200,000 for the 
Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group, $200,000 for Long Live the 
Kings, and $300,000 to restore funding for the Tampa and 
Florida panhandle field offices, and a decrease of $2,500,000 
to the proposed coastal program expansion.
    In the environmental contaminants program, there is an 
increase of $2,700,000. The Committee rejects the budget 
proposal to reduce this account.
    Refuges and wildlife.--The Committee recommends 
$490,358,000 for refuges and wildlife, a decrease of $2,783,000 
below the budget request.
    In refuge operations, there is a net increase of $500,000. 
For wildlife and habitat management, there is a $7,600,000 
decrease for the departmental challenge cost share program, and 
increases of $1,400,000 to restore the spartina grass control 
program at the Willapa NWR, WA, $1,000,000 for cooperative 
projects with friends groups on invasive species control, 
$1,100,000 to restore the base budget for general operations, 
and $2,000,000 to continue ``minimum staffing'' implementation 
using an updated refuge operating needs system. For refuge 
visitor services, there are increases of $2,000,000 to restore 
the visitor facility enhancements program and $600,000 to 
restore the base budget for general operations.
    In migratory bird management, there is a decrease of 
$3,483,000. For conservation and monitoring decreases include 
$750,000 for focal species management, $200,000 for survey and 
monitoring, and $200,000 for population and habitat assessment. 
For the joint ventures program, decreases include $1,433,000 
for new joint ventures, $800,000 for existing joint ventures, 
and $100,000 for national administration. The Committee is very 
supportive of the migratory bird management program and has 
retained some of the increases proposed in the budget request.
    In law enforcement operations, there is an increase of 
$200,000 to restore partially the law enforcement vehicle 
replacement program.
    Fisheries.--The Committee recommends $118,756,000 for 
fisheries, an increase of $11,100,000 above the budget request. 
For hatchery operations, there is a decrease of $600,000. For 
hatchery maintenance, there is an increase of $1,500,000 to 
restore partially whirling disease research. For fish and 
wildlife management, increases include $1,150,000 to restore 
the proposed general reduction, $1,750,000 for the national 
fish habitat initiative, $1,700,000 to restore the fish passage 
program, $500,000 to restore the Great Lakes fish and wildlife 
restoration program, $2,000,000 for Washington State salmon 
mass marking of hatchery fish, $500,000 for Washington hatchery 
improvement to be divided equally between the Hatchery 
Scientific Review Group and Long Live the Kings, $250,000 for 
the Regional Mark Processing Center, and $350,000 for Yukon 
River Salmon Treaty programs. There is also an increase of 
$2,000,000 to restore the marine mammals program.
    General Administration.--The Committee recommends 
$135,218,000 for general administration, a net increase of 
$1,025,000 above the budget request. In general operations, 
there is an increase of $2,025,000 to restore the proposed 
reduction for unidentified management efficiencies. For the 
National Conservation Training Center, there is a decrease of 
$375,000 for operations and an increase of $375,000 for 
maintenance. For the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, 
there is an increase of $300,000 to restore the base program. 
For the science excellence initiative, there is a decrease of 
$1,500,000. In international affairs, there is a decrease of 
$200,000 for the international wildlife trade program and an 
increase of $400,000 to restore base funding 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 $18,130,000, as requested, is earmarked for 
listing, of which $12,852,000 is earmarked for critical habitat 
designation.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. Funds provided for wolf monitoring in Idaho include 
$460,000 for the Nez Perce Tribe, $940,000 for the Idaho Office 
of Species Conservation, and $100,000 for the Service's Snake 
River Basin Office.
    2. Funds for the Gabbro soils inventory are to conduct a 
survey to evaluate the degree of protection afforded five plant 
species relative to recovery plan targets.
    3. The Committee has retained the proposed general increase 
for the Endangered Species Act consultation program and expects 
the Service to use this increase to address the backlog of 
critical consultation needs such as those associated with the 
American burying beetle in Oklahoma and the extraordinary needs 
in California.
    4. Last year the Committee urged the Service and the 
Department not to abandon their commitment to addressing the 
critical operations and maintenance backlog needs of the 
National Wildlife Refuge System now that 100th anniversary of 
the refuge system has passed. The Service was directed to 
update its minimum staffing analysis, which forms the basis for 
tier one of the Refuge Operating Needs System, no later than 
January 15, 2005. The Committee has not received that updated 
analysis and expects the Service to comply with that 
requirement prior to conference action on the fiscal year 2006 
appropriations bill.
    5. In fulfilling its responsibilities for the operation of 
Vieques NWR, the Service should continue to consult with the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    6. The increase above the 2005 level for migratory bird 
management should be used mainly to fill the large number of 
critical staff vacancies.
    7. The Peregrine Fund should be funded at $700,000 in 
fiscal year 2006, which includes $300,000 for Northern Aplomado 
Falcon recovery activities.
    8. 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 2007 budget justification should include an 
update on the Service's efforts in this area.
    9. The Committee commends the extensive efforts of the 
fisheries program over the past year to collect, correct, and 
standardize data on program spending and to identify critical 
operational shortfalls caused by base budget erosion. The 
Committee-recommended increases to the base budget are based on 
those data. The Committee expects the fisheries program to 
address inequities in field station funding when allocating 
base budget increases; to include consideration of reimbursable 
funding; to incorporate the results of the recent workforce 
planning effort; and to maintain salary and benefit costs, as a 
percent of total budget, at the same levels for each field 
station.
    10. The Committee is pleased with the development of the 
National Fish Habitat Initiative, and believes that this model 
has the potential to be a very effective tool for reversing the 
declines of aquatic species caused largely by habitat 
degradation. The Committee recommends $1,750,000 for the 
National Fish Habitat Initiative. Of the amount provided, 80% 
should be used to implement on-the-ground, cost-shared habitat 
restoration projects, identified in the Fisheries Operational 
Needs System and in direct support of fish habitat partnerships 
and pilot joint ventures, and 20% should be used to support 
continued development of the National Fish Habitat Plan.
    11. The Committee is concerned about the number of depleted 
populations of Federal trust species; particularly those 
lacking adequate population assessments and management plans. 
Many of these species are indicators of larger ecosystem and 
human health issues and regular monitoring of the health of 
these populations is necessary. The Committee is pleased with 
the efforts of the fisheries program to address this need, and 
expects that a portion of the recommended base budget increase 
will be used for this purpose. The Committee further encourages 
the Service to support this effort in future budget requests.
    12. 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 and has provided 
$500,000 for the Service and $200,000 for the Survey for the 
initiative.
    13. The Committee has recommended bill language in Title 
IV--General provisions prohibiting the use of funds for Safecom 
and Disaster.gov activities. Funds requested for these 
activities should be reprogrammed to cover equitably program 
shortfalls not funded in the budget request (associated with 
the underestimates of administrative costs when the Cost 
Allocation Methodology funds were realigned to programs in 
fiscal year 2005) .
    14. Since enactment of the Captive Wildlife Safety Act, the 
Service has worked to craft the required regulations. The 
Service is pursuing this effort, in consultation with the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service, and is committed to providing an effective and 
enforceable framework for implementing this law. The Committee 
expects the Service to publish a proposed rule as soon as 
possible and to report to the Committee on implementation 
requirements (funding and staffing) associated with the rule no 
later than November 1, 2005.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $93,210,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        19,676,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        41,206,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -52,004,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +21,530,000


    The Committee recommends $41,206,000 for construction, a 
decrease of $52,004,000 below the fiscal year 2005 level and an 
increase of $21,530,000 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.........................  Water Supply Improvements              0           725           725
                                             [cc].
Clark R. Bavin Forensics Laboratory, OR...  Renovation/Upgrade Facility--          0         3,355         3,355
                                             Phase II [cc].
Crab Orchard NWR, IL......................  Visitor Center Dam                 2,625         2,625             0
                                             Rehabilitation [cc].
Big Oaks NWR, IN..........................  Old Timbers Lake Dam                 150           150             0
                                             Rehabilitation--Phase II [d/
                                             cc].
Balcones Canyonlands NWR, TX..............  Martin Lake and Martin West          500           500             0
                                             Dams [p/d/cc].
Kenai NWR, AK.............................  Visitor Center/Water and               0           500           500
                                             Sewer Lines [cc].
Klamath Basin NWR Complex, CA.............  Water Supply and Management--          0         2,500         2,500
                                             Phase V [cc].
Kofa NWR, AZ..............................  Structural Replacement of          1,515         1,515             0
                                             Four Buildings--Phase II
                                             [cc].
Craig Brook NFH, ME.......................  Wastewater Treatment               2,480         2,480             0
                                             Compliance--Phase III [cc].
Division of Safety, Security and Aviation.  Replacement of Survey              1,500         1,500             0
                                             Aircraft--Phase III.
Fish Springs NWR, UT......................  Seismic Safety/Rehabilitation          0           300           300
                                             of 6 Buildings [cc].
Hanford Reach NM/Saddle Mountain NWR, WA..  Visitor Center [cc]..........          0         2,250         2,250
Northwest Power Planning Area.............  Fish Screens, etc............          0         3,000         3,000
Servicewide...............................  Bridge Safety Inspections....        570           570             0
Servicewide...............................  Dam Safety Programs &                720           720             0
                                             Inspections.
Servicewide...............................  Visitor Contact Facilities...          0         5,000         5,000
Tualatin NWR, OR..........................  Visitor Center and                     0         3,900         3,900
                                             Administration Building [cc].
                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Line Item Construction....  .............................     10,060        31,590        21,530
                                           =====================================================================
Nationwide Engineering Services:
    Cost Allocation Methodology...........  .............................      2,456         2,456             0
    Environmental Compliance..............  .............................      1,000         1,000             0
    Other, non-project specific Nationwide  .............................      5,900         5,900             0
     Engineering Services.
    Seismic Safety Program................  .............................        130           130             0
    Waste Prevention, Recycling,            .............................        130           130             0
     Environmental Management.
                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Nationwide Engineering      .............................      9,616         9,616             0
       Services.
                                           =====================================================================
      Total...............................  .............................     19,676        41,206        21,530
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Service should continue to use a standardized design 
approach for visitor centers and should request funding for 
visitor centers on the priority list. The Committee has 
provided funding to complete several projects that are 
currently underway. The budget request was irresponsible in not 
including construction funds for construction projects in 
process.

                            LAND ACQUISITION




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $37,005,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        40,992,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        14,937,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -22,068,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       -26,055,000


    The Committee recommends $14,937,000 for land acquisition, 
a decrease of $26,055,000 below the budget request and 
$22,068,000 below the enacted level. This amount includes 
$1,750,000 for inholdings, $1,750,000 for emergencies and 
hardships, $1,724,000 for exchanges, $7,893,000 for acquisition 
management, and $1,820,000 for cost allocation methodology.

                      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 Commonwealth of the Northern 
Mariana Islands, and American Samoa.




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $21,694,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        40,000,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        23,700,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +2,006,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       -16,300,000


    The Committee recommends $23,700,000 for the landowner 
incentive program, an increase of $2,006,000 above the fiscal 
year 2005 level and $16,300,000 below the budget request.
    Given the constrained allocation for fiscal year 2006, the 
Committee has focused on restoring funding for the core, 
proven, mission-essential programs of the Service. The 
Committee does not object to new programs, but these grant 
programs should only be funded in addition to, and not at the 
expense of, mission-essential programs including proven, cost-
shared, partnership programs.

                       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, 2005...........................        $6,903,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        10,000,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         7,386,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +483,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        -2,614,000


    The committee recommends $7,386,000 for private stewardship 
grants, an increase of $483,000 above the fiscal year 2005 
level and $2,614,000 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, 2005...........................       $80,462,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        80,000,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        84,400,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +3,938,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        +4,400,000


    The Committee recommends $84,400,000 for the cooperative 
endangered species conservation fund, an increase of $3,938,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 level and $4,400,000 above the 
budget request. The increase to the budget request is for 
habitat conservation plan land acquisition.
    Bill Language.--Language is included 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.

                     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 $20,914,000 in 
fiscal year 2006 with $14,414,000 derived from this 
appropriation and $6,500,000 from net refuge receipts estimated 
to be collected in fiscal year 2005.




 Appropriation enacted, 2005..........................       $14,214,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        14,414,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        14,414,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +200,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $14,414,000, the budget request, 
for the National wildlife refuge fund, an increase of $200,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 funding level.

               NORTH AMERICAN WETLANDS CONSERVATION FUND

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




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $37,472,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        49,949,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        40,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +2,528,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -9,949,000


    The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for the North American 
wetlands conservation fund, an increase of $2,528,000 above the 
fiscal year 2005 level and $9,949,000 below the budget request. 
Decreases to the budget request include $9,549,000 for wetlands 
conservation grants and $400,000 for program administration.

                NEOTROPICAL MIGRATORY BIRD CONSERVATION

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




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $3,944,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................                 0
Recommended, 2006.....................................         4,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................           +56,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        +4,000,000


    The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for the neotropical 
migratory bird conservation program, an increase of $56,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 level and $4,000,000 above the 
budget request. The Administration proposed $4,000,000 for this 
program as part of the multinational species conservation fund.
    This program provides critically needed resources for 
conservation of neotropical migratory birds. The Committee 
expects the Service to coordinate closely with the Service's 
international program on neotropical migratory bird 
conservation program implementation.

                MULTINATIONAL SPECIES CONSERVATION FUND

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




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $5,719,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         8,300,000
Recommended, 2005.....................................         5,900,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +181,000
    Budget estimate, 2005.............................        -2,400,000


    The Committee recommends $5,900,000 for the multinational 
species conservation fund, an increase of $181,000 above the 
fiscal year 2005 level and $2,400,000 below the budget request. 
Changes to the budget request include a decrease of $4,000,000 
for neotropical migratory birds (which is funded in a separate 
account) and increases of $400,000 for African elephant 
conservation, $400,000 for Asian elephant conservation, 
$300,000 for rhinoceros and tiger conservation and $500,000 for 
great ape conservation. The Committee expects these funds to be 
matched by non-Federal funding to leverage private 
contributions to the maximum extent possible.

                    STATE AND TRIBAL WILDLIFE GRANTS

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




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $69,028,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        74,000,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        65,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        -4,028,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        -9,000,000


    The Committee recommends $65,000,000 for State and tribal 
wildlife grants, a decrease of $4,028,000 below the fiscal year 
2005 level and $9,000,000 below the budget request. Within the 
amount provided, $6,000,000 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 2006 funds remain 
unobligated at the end of fiscal year 2007, the unobligated 
funds will be reapportioned to all States and eligible 
entities, together with any new appropriations provided in 
fiscal year 2008. Bill language also is included providing 
direction on redistributing funds for States with disapproved 
plans.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. Not more than 3 percent of the appropriated amount may 
be used for Federal administration of the program. 
Administrative costs for each grantee should also be held to a 
minimum so that the maximum amount of funding is used for on-
the-ground projects.
    2. Funds made available under this account should be added 
to revenues from existing State sources and not serve as a 
substitute for revenues from such sources.
    3. Priority for the use of these funds should be placed on 
those species with the greatest conservation need. Funds should 
be used to address the habitat requirements of species 
identified in State wildlife plans/strategies in order to 
preclude the need to list more species as threatened or 
endangered under the Endangered Species Act.
    The Committee reiterates its expectation that each State 
and other participating entity in the formula grant program 
will submit its comprehensive wildlife conservation plan on 
time. The Service should notify each State or other entity, as 
soon as possible after receipt of its plan, whether the plan is 
approved, conditionally approved, or disapproved. If a plan is 
conditionally approved, the submitting entity should be given a 
limited but reasonable amount of time to address the Service's 
concerns and submit a revised plan for approval. Such extension 
of time should not exceed 6 months. If a plan is disapproved, 
the submitting entity is no longer entitled to receive funds 
from the program. Should an entity with a disapproved plan 
elect to submit a revised plan in the future, it may do so but, 
until a plan is approved, that entity will not be entitled to 
receive any funds from the program.

                         National Park Service

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

                 OPERATION OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................    $1,683,564,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................     1,734,053,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................     1,754,199,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       +70,635,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +20,146,000


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


    The Committee recommends $1,754,199,000 for operation of 
the National Park System, an increase of $70,635,000 above the 
enacted level and $20,146,000 above the budget request. The 
Committee has redirected funds to provide for a $30,000,000 
base increase for the parks. This is in addition to the budget 
request which provides for pay and uncontrollable expenses. 
These funds are to be distributed proportionately to all park 
units and to remain in park base budgets.
    Resource Stewardship.--The Committee recommends 
$354,116,000 for resources stewardship, the same as the budget 
request and $6,080,000 above the enacted level.
    Included in this amount are increases above the enacted 
level of $4,931,000 for natural resources challenge vital 
signs. The Committee accepts the following reductions in the 
budget: $648,000 for fleet management reform, and $3,931,000 
for the Natural Resource Preservation Program. Also included is 
$5,728,000 for uncontrollable expenses.
    Visitor Services.--The Committee recommends $346,181,000 
for visitor services, the same as the budget request and 
$7,727,000 above the enacted level. Included in this amount is 
an increase above the enacted level of $119,000 for fee 
metrics/data analysis. The Committee accepts the following 
reductions in the budget: $129,000 for fleet management reform, 
and $986,000 for the Presidential Inaugural activities. Also 
included is $8,723,000 for uncontrollable expenses.
    Maintenance.--The Committee recommends $594,686,000 for 
maintenance, a reduction of $900,000 below the budget request 
and $11,947,000 above the enacted level. Included in this 
amount is an increase of $2,500,000 for repair and 
rehabilitation of historic structures. The Committee accepts a 
reduction of $388,000 for fleet management reform. Also 
included is $9,835,000 for uncontrollable expenses. Within the 
total amount provided for repair and rehabilitation, there is 
$80,000 for campground rehabilitation at Ozark National Scenic 
Riverways, $200,000 for historic landscaping at Gettysburg NMP, 
$200,000 for Alice Ferguson (Wareham Lodge), $497,000 for 
Indiana Dunes NL (West Beach), $206,000 for Indiana Dunes NL 
(Dunbar Beach), $300,000 for Death Valley NP (Cow Creek), 
$140,000 for San Juan NHS sewer repairs, and $243,000 for El 
Morro restrooms.
    Park Support.--The Committee recommends $298,659,000 for 
park support, a reduction of $8,594,000 from the budget 
request, and $8,259,000 above the enacted level. Included in 
this amount are increases of $400,000 for Jamestown 2007, 
$578,000 for IT intrusion detection, $525,000 to establish an 
IT test lab, $750,000 for an IT security plan review, $500,000 
for IT upgrade equipment, $1,725,000 for an IT active directory 
and $1,235,000 for the enterprise services network. The 
Committee accepts the following reductions in the budget: 
$129,000 for fleet management reform, $1,416,000 for management 
efficiencies, $644,000 for IT certification and accreditation, 
$87,000 for E-Government initiatives, $247,000 for wild and 
Scenic Rivers and $2,427,000 for Lewis and Clark challenge cost 
share. Also included is $7,496,000 for uncontrollable expenses. 
The Committee expects the Service to continue to allocate one-
third of the funds provided for the challenge cost share 
program to the National Trails System.
    The Committee has been unable to provide funds for the 
cooperative conservation challenge cost share program because 
of fiscal constraints. However, the Committee remains 
supportive of the concept and has provided funds to continue 
the traditional agency challenge cost share program and has no 
objection to broadening the scope of the ongoing program to 
encompass resource protection activities.
    External Administrative Costs.--The Committee recommends 
$130,557,000 for external administrative costs, the same as the 
budget request and $6,622,000 above the enacted level. The 
Committee accepts the reduction of $1,337,000 for central 
office consolidation (GSA space rental). Also included is 
$7,959,000 for uncontrollable expenses.
    South Florida Initiative.--The Committee continues its 
support for the restoration of the Everglades and the 
protection and preservation of the national parks and national 
wildlife refuges located in the region. Since this initiative 
began, 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, science, the South Florida 
Ecosystem Restoration Task Force, Modified Water Deliveries, 
and the Department's participation in implementing the 
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. The Committee 
recognizes that although progress has been made in the last 
decade, challenges remain. These challenges must be addressed 
to ensure that the Everglades is preserved and restored and 
that the Federal investment in the Everglades is protected. To 
this end, it is imperative that overall Everglades restoration 
goals, as established by the South Florida Ecosystem 
Restoration Task Force, as well as individual project 
restoration goals, be achieved.
    The Committee remains deeply concerned over efforts to 
improve water quality. 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. The Committee remains troubled that the 
State of Florida is not fully achieving its obligations under 
the 1992 Consent Decree entered in United States v. South 
Florida Water Management District. The Committee understands 
that the interim levels for total phosphorus concentration at 
A.R.M. Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge, which remain in 
effect until more protective and stringent levels are required 
at the beginning of 2007, were exceeded in 2002 and again in 
2004. This trend is troubling. The Committee understands that 
the U.S. District Court, which retains jurisdiction over the 
Consent Decree, is considering whether exceeding these interim 
levels should be deemed a violation of the Consent Decree. 
Notwithstanding the outcome of the court proceedings, the 
Committee directs the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to keep 
the Committee fully apprised of its effort to establish 
additional water quality monitoring and modeling at A.R.M. 
Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge. The Committee directs 
that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provide the Committee 
with the refuge's annual and quarterly reports summarizing the 
implementation of the additional monitoring and modeling at the 
refuge. Additionally, 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 expeditiously and 
on-time in the future as the report is long over-due. In the 
interim, the Committee expects that the Department will 
continue its work with its State and Federal partners to ensure 
that discharges to A.R.M. Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge 
and Everglades National Park achieve the levels and limits 
specified in the Consent Decree and do not cause adverse impact 
to these important Federal resources.
    The Committee is also concerned that the Everglades 
restoration program may not be proceeding in a manner that 
guarantees the achievement of the primary Federal interest, the 
restoration of the Everglades. The strong intergovernmental 
partnership that is necessary for restoration success is not 
apparent. Although the Committee appreciates the State of 
Florida's announcement of its Acceler8 program and its 
intention to provide up-front funding to implement a number of 
Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan projects within the 
next five years, the Committee has heard concerns expressed by 
some stakeholders that the Acceler8 program was developed 
without adequate collaboration and that the projects being 
implemented are largely water storage projects and do not 
provide the anticipated natural system benefits. Given these 
concerns, the Committee directs the Secretary of the Interior, 
in consultation with the Secretary of the Army, to submit a 
report by December 31, 2005 on the status of the Everglades 
restoration projects now underway. The report should summarize 
the status of the projects, the anticipated environmental 
benefits of each project, and whether the projects being 
implemented by the State and the Army Corps together provide 
for natural system restoration. To the extent that changes in 
the sequencing of projects are necessary to achieve natural 
system restoration, the Committee directs that the report 
recommend such changes.
    Additionally, the Committee has heard concerns expressed by 
some stakeholders that some non-Federal lands may need to be 
acquired to fully achieve natural system restoration. In 
response to questions posed by the Committee, the Department 
agrees that this is a valid concern. Given that the South 
Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force has developed a land 
acquisition strategy that identifies the lands that remain to 
be acquired, as well as tools that may be available to assist 
in the acquisition of these lands, the Committee directs the 
Secretary of the Interior, as Chair of the South Florida 
Ecosystem Restoration Task Force (Task Force), to provide a 
more detailed report to the Committee from the Task Force 
identifying and prioritizing for acquisition the lands that are 
necessary to achieve natural system restoration goals. The 
report should identify funding strategies involving innovative 
partnerships, as well as timeframes, as to when the necessary 
lands will be acquired so that they will be available for 
restoration purposes. The Committee directs that the Secretary 
of the Interior submit the Task Force report no later than 
December 31, 2005.
    The Committee is pleased with the improvements in 
coordination that the Department has made to its science 
programs supporting Everglades restoration activities. The 
Department's Science Plan provides a road-map to ensure that 
the science that is being conducted supports the needs of the 
land managing agencies and the decisions that will affect 
Interior-managed resources. Similar to last year, the Committee 
directs that the Department submit a report by December 31, 
2005 describing the scientific research projects to be funded 
in the National Park Service and the U.S. Geological Survey 
with the fiscal year 2006 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.
    National Park Foundation.--Last year, the Committee 
directed the National Park Service to work cooperatively with 
the National Park Foundation to implement fully the GAO 
recommendations regarding improving communications, 
documentation and strategic focus of activities. These 
recommendations also addressed ways to strengthen the Proud 
Partner program that would ensure transparency and 
accountability. The Committee appreciates the level of 
cooperation by both the Service and the new leadership of the 
National Park Foundation. The National Park Service Director 
has assured the Committee all GAO recommendations have been 
implemented and that the Service will have full access to the 
details of all future and renewal Proud Partners agreements and 
will be a signatory to those agreements.
    The Service is reminded that existing agency policies, as 
well as sound financial management practices, require that all 
fundraising that benefits the National Park Service, including 
activities of the Foundation, require written agreements and 
approved fundraising plans.
    Other.--The Committee continues to support the decision by 
Ozark National Scenic Riverways to retain the carpentry and 
maintenance positions at the park. The Committee recognizes the 
urgent needs at ONSR for these skilled personnel. The Committee 
expects that these positions will be retained.
    The Committee understands that the Service is working 
closely with the Town of Blowing Rock, North Carolina to 
resolve permanently, through administrative means or, if 
necessary, a land exchange, the long standing issue of the 
access to water as part of the town's municipal water supply. 
The Committee expects the Service to allow the town of Blowing 
Rock to continue its water usage while moving forward with the 
needed steps to provide a permanent remedy, including 
facilitating and funding the necessary compliance effort. The 
Committee requests a status report no later than March 1, 2006.
    The Committee expects the Service to provide the same level 
of funding as provided in fiscal year 2005 for the Johnstown 
Area Heritage Association Museum, as well as the Ice Age 
National Scientific Reserve, and continue this funding in the 
operations account in future years.
    The Committee strongly encourages the National Park Service 
to complete the management plan for the Cedar Creek and Belle 
Grove National Historical Park no later than September 1, 2007.
    Bill language is included under this account specifying how 
the additional park base increase should be allocated.

                       UNITED STATES PARK POLICE




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $80,076,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        80,411,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        82,411,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +2,335,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        +2,000,000


    The Committee recommends $82,411,000 for the U.S. Park 
Police, an increase of $2,000,000 above the budget request and 
$2,335,000 above the enacted level. Increases from the enacted 
level are for uncontrollable expenses and for new recruit 
classes. Decreases from the enacted level totaling $986,000 are 
for Inauguration activities.
    The Committee directs the U.S. Park Police to submit a 
final report no later than January 15, 2006, detailing how it 
has implemented each recommendation in the original National 
Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) report. If certain 
recommendations have not been agreed to, a full explanation is 
required. This process has taken nearly four years and three 
NAPA studies to complete. The Committee expects final 
resolution by the above mentioned date.

                  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, 2005...........................       $60,973,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        36,777,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        48,997,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -11,976,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +12,220,000


    The Committee recommends $48,997,000 for national 
recreation and preservation, an increase of $12,220,000 above 
the budget request and a reduction of $11,976,000 below the 
enacted level. The Committee has agreed with the budget request 
and has eliminated the Statutory or Contractual Aid category. 
Critical elements of this account have been moved to the 
operations account.
    The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 
budget estimate by activity are shown in the following table:


    Recreation Programs.--The Committee recommends $554,000 for 
recreation programs, the same as the budget request and an 
increase of $11,000 above the enacted level. The increase is 
for uncontrollable expenses.
    Natural Programs.--The Committee recommends $9,545,000 for 
natural programs, the same as the budget request and a decrease 
of $1,320,000 below the enacted level. Programmatic decreases 
include $512,000 for rivers and trails studies, $500,000 for 
rivers, trails, and conservation assistance and $495,000 for 
national natural landmarks. An increase of $187,000 is for 
uncontrollable expenses.
    Cultural Programs.--The Committee recommends $19,953,000 
for cultural programs, an increase of $2,231,000 above the 
budget request and $200,000 below the enacted level. The 
programmatic increase includes the restoration of $1,931,000 
for the National Center for Preservation Technology and 
Training in Louisiana. The Committee strongly urges the Service 
to continue to provide funding for this purpose in future 
budget submissions.
    In addition, $300,000 is provided to produce a digitization 
design plan for a long range project to digitize archival 
records consisting of over 80,000 listings of buildings, 
districts, sites, structures, and objects in the National 
Register of Historic Places. In designing this plan, the 
Service should be creative in working with entities such as the 
Library of Congress both for technical assistance and to avoid 
duplication of systems. While the Committee understands the 
critical need and importance of this project, the Service must 
prioritize its needs in future budget requests.
    Decreases to cultural programs include $99,000 for 
Gettysburg, $100,000 for Creole Heritage Center, and $296,000 
for underground railroad grants. An increase of $215,000 is 
provided for uncontrollable expenses. Within available funds, 
the Service is directed to initiate planning authorized in the 
American Revolution Commemoration Act. The Service is strongly 
encouraged to provide funds in the fiscal year 2007 budget for 
this activity.
    International Park Affairs.--The Committee recommends 
$1,618,000 for international park affairs, the same as the 
budget request and $25,000 above the enacted level. This 
increase is for uncontrollable expenses.
    Environmental and Compliance Review.--The Committee 
recommends $399,000 for environmental and compliance review, 
the same as the budget request and $8,000 above the enacted 
level. This increase is for uncontrollable expenses.
    Grant Administration.--The Committee recommends $1,913,000 
for grant administration, the same as the budget request and 
$47,000 above the enacted level. his increase is for 
uncontrollable expenses.
    The Committee has not provided funds for the Chesapeake Bay 
Gateways and Water Trail initiative. Since fiscal year 2000, 
this Committee has provided $9,500,000 for this effort. A 
routine oversight program review conducted by the House 
Appropriations Committee's Surveys and Investigation staff 
uncovered several problems. The report indicates that there is 
a deficiency of responsible program management including, but 
not limited to, a lack of scrutiny of the matching fund 
requirements, use of grant funds to subsidize operations at 
grant sites, and an inappropriate use of grant funds with third 
party non-profit organizations. The review concluded that in 
addition to poor management, there was clearly too much funding 
chasing too few eligible projects.
    Heritage Partnership Program.--The Committee recommends 
$15,015,000 for heritage partnerships, an increase of 
$9,989,000 above the budget request and $436,000 above the 
enacted level. The Committee recommends the following 
distribution of funds:

        Project                                                   Amount
America's Agricultural Heritage Partnership (Silos & 
    Smokestacks)........................................        $750,000
Augusta Canal National Heritage Area....................         400,000
Automobile National Heritage Area.......................         500,000
Blue Ridge National Heritage Area.......................         900,000
Cane River National Heritage Area.......................         900,000
Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor..........         800,000
Erie Canalway National Corridor.........................         700,000
Essex National Heritage Area............................         900,000
Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area..............         500,000
John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage 
    Corridor............................................         845,000
Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area................         650,000
Mississippi Gulf National Heritage Area.................         175,000
National Aviation Heritage Area.........................         200,000
National Coal Heritage Area.............................         123,000
Ohio and Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor..........         900,000
Oil Region National Heritage Area.......................         200,000
Quinnebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage 
    Corridor............................................         850,000
Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area..................         900,000
Schuylkill River Valley National Heritage Area..........         500,000
Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic 
    District............................................         500,000
South Carolina National Heritage Corridor...............         900,000
Tennessee Civil War Heritage Area.......................         500,000
Wheeling National Heritage Area.........................         900,000
Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area....................         400,000
    Subtotal, Projects..................................      14,893,000
Administration..........................................         122,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
    Total...............................................     $15,015,000

                       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, 2005...........................       $71,739,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        66,205,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        72,705,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +966,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        +6,500,000


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


    The Committee recommends $72,705,000 for historic 
preservation fund programs, an increase of $6,500,000 above the 
budget request and $966,000 above the enacted level.
    The Committee recommendation provides $36,000,000 for State 
historic preservation offices, $3,205,000 for tribal grants, 
$30,000,000 for Save America's Treasure grants, and $3,500,000 
for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU). The 
HBCU program is a competitive program administered by the 
Service. The cost share on this program is 70 percent Federal 
and, 30 percent private. In addition, there are HBCU unexpended 
balances of $6,300,000 that have been available since 2000. 
Because of budget constraints, the Committee has not agreed to 
fund a new Preserve America initiative.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $352,982,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       307,362,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       291,230,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -61,752,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       -16,132,000


    The Committee recommends $291,230,000 for construction, a 
decrease of $16,132,000 below the budget request and 
$61,752,000 below the enacted level.
    The Committee recommends the following distribution of 
funds:

        Project                                                   Amount
Amistad National Recreation Area, TX....................      $1,003,000
Big Bend National Park, TX (curatorial).................       2,100,000
Blue Ridge Parkway, NC..................................         804,000
Blue Ridge Parkway, NC (visitor center).................       3,500,000
Chaco Culture National Historical Park, NM..............       4,238,000
Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park, DC/
    MD/WV...............................................       1,847,000
Cumberland Island National Seashore, GA (Plum Orchard)..       3,247,000
Cuyahoga Valley National Park, OH (rehabilitation)......       2,500,000
Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park, OH 
    (Wright Dunbar Plaza)...............................         450,000
Death Valley National Park, CA..........................       5,791,000
Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, PA (cabins)         700,000
Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area, NJ.........       2,871,000
Everglades National Park, FL............................      25,000,000
Fire Island National Seashore, NY.......................         764,000
George Washington Memorial Parkway, VA (Arlington House)       1,251,000
George Washington Memorial Parkway, VA (maintenance)....         400,000
Glacier National Park, MT...............................         758,000
Grand Portage National Monument, MN.....................       4,000,000
Grand Teton National Park, WY...........................       1,673,000
Gulf Islands National Seashore, FL/MS...................         971,000
Homestead National Historic Site, NE (visitor center)...       1,000,000
Hopewell Culture National Historical Park, OH...........         389,000
Hot Springs National Park, AR...........................       6,059,000
Independence National Historical Park, PA...............       3,932,000
Independence National Historical Park, PA...............       2,000,000
Kalaupapa National Historical Park, HI..................       3,779,000
Keweenaw National Historical Park, MI (Calumet- Hecla)..       1,650,000
Lincoln Library, IL.....................................       4,000,000
Moccasin Bend NAD, TN (erosion).........................       2,000,000
Mount Rainier National Park, WA.........................      14,307,000
Mount Rainier National Park, WA.........................       7,900,000
Olympic National Park, WA...............................      10,098,000
Pinnacles National Monument, CA.........................       4,794,000
Point Reyes National Seashore, CA.......................       2,160,000
Redwood National Park, CA...............................       2,169,000
Rosie the Riveter National Historical Park, CA 
    (planning)..........................................         200,000
San Francisco Maritime National Historical Park, CA.....       4,350,000
Saratoga National Historical Park, NY (Victory Woods)...         310,000
Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site, MA............       3,078,000
Shenandoah National Park, VA............................       4,835,000
Southwest Pennsylvania Heritage Commission, PA..........       2,500,000
Statue of Liberty/Ellis Island National Monuments, NJ...       8,452,000
Stones River National Battlefield, TN (tour)............         610,000
Tuskegee Airmen National Historic Site, AL..............       6,767,000
White House, DC.........................................       6,523,000
Wind Cave National Park, SD.............................       4,928,000
Wolf Trap National Park, VA.............................       3,000,000
Yellowstone National Park, WY...........................      11,118,000
Yellowstone National Park, WY...........................       4,114,000
Yellowstone National Park, WY...........................      11,175,000
Yosemite National Park, CA..............................       2,176,000
    Project Total.......................................     204,241,000
Emergency/Unscheduled...................................       3,944,000
Housing.................................................       7,889,000
Equipment replacement...................................      26,900,000
Planning, construction..................................      19,925,000
General management plans................................      13,754,000
Construction program management.........................      28,605,000
Dam safety..............................................       2,662,000
Managed partnership projects............................         310,000
    Subtotal............................................     103,989,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
Subtotal (before use of prior year funds)...............     308,230,000
Use of prior year balances..............................     -17,000,000
    Total Construction..................................    $291,230,000

    The Committee commends the Service for the quality of its 
construction budget in recent years. The focus on critical 
backlog maintenance over the last ten years has made a 
significant impact on the most serious projects and the impact 
of the Choosing By Advantage system is very evident on small 
but significant projects that had not competed well in the 
past. In addition, the Committee is pleased at the progress 
made on the condition assessments as well as the new asset 
management program that is focused on life-cycle costs. 
Hopefully, this will help prevent reoccurrence of a large 
deferred maintenance backlog in the future.
    The Committee believes that keeping up with backlog 
maintenance needs should remain a high priority. However, the 
Service should begin to integrate the most critical, new 
construction requirements into future budget submissions. The 
Committee continues to be concerned that, each year, the same 
parks seem to appear in the line item construction request. In 
many cases, there are multiple projects for one park unit. It 
is obvious that certain parks have been competing well within 
the system, however, professional judgment needs to be applied 
to ensure fairness and equity to all park units. The Committee 
strongly encourages the Service to make adjustments in future 
budget requests.
    Although the Committee understands that much of the 
unobligated balances in construction are tied to large 
projects, and acknowledges the progress made to expend these 
funds, the Committee continues to encourage the Service to 
reduce these balances to a more reasonable level.
    Partnership Construction Projects.--The Committee is 
pleased with the recent progress that has been made to get 
large partnership construction projects under control. However, 
the Committee reminds the Service that most of the 44 projects 
should not be forwarded to Congress for funding and those that 
do complete the new process, and are considered high 
priorities, should be included in annual budget requests when 
appropriate. With the Director's personal assurance, the 
Committee understands that there will be no surprises in the 
future and that all parks will adhere to the long-standing bill 
language requiring Committee notification and approval prior to 
any commitment on projects in excess of $5,000,000.
    The Committee expects that Director's order 21 will be 
finalized no later than July 15, 2005. Any future modifications 
to this agreement should be forwarded to the Committee.
    Curatorial Facilities.--The Committee has noticed a growing 
number of parks requesting curatorial facilities. The Committee 
acknowledges that many collections in the parks are not stored 
under ideal circumstances. The Service has three separate 
facilities to deal with this issue; the Midwest Archeological 
Center, the Northeast Cultural Resources Center and the new 
Western Archeological Center, which has significant storage 
space remaining.
    It is obvious that decisions on these individual park 
facilities are being made ad hoc without any Service-wide 
analysis or plan. The Committee directs the Associate Director 
for Cultural Resources to work with the Associate Director for 
Park Planning, Facilities, and Lands to study the issue of 
collection storage in the parks and report findings and 
recommendations to the Committee by September 2006. Any future 
funding requirements should be weighed against other Service-
wide priorities.
    Other.--The Committee has included $2,100,000 to complete 
the curatorial facility at Big Bend National Park; $3,500,000 
to continue work on the Blue Ridge Parkway destination center; 
$3,247,000 to complete rehabilitation work on the Cumberland 
Island National Seashore, Plum Orchard home, and $2,500,000 for 
rehabilitation work at Cuyahoga Valley National Park in Ohio.
    Funding in the amount of $450,000 is provided to complete 
work on the Wright Dunbar Plaza, part of Dayton Aviation 
Heritage National Historical Park; $700,000 is to continue 
cabin replacement at the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation 
Area; $400,000 is for maintenance projects along the George 
Washington Parkway in Virginia, and $1,000,000 is to continue 
work on the Homestead National Historic Site visitor center.
    The Committee has provided $1,650,000 to complete work on 
the Calumet-Hecla House in Keweenaw National Historical Park; 
$4,000,000 for the Lincoln Library; $2,000,000 for erosion work 
at Moccasin Bend NAD; $200,000 to initiate planning for the 
Rosie the Riveter National Historical Park, and $310,000 to 
complete work on the Saratoga National Historical Park, Victory 
Woods project. In addition, $2,500,000 is provided for the 
Southwest Pennsylvania Heritage Commission and $610,000 is for 
planning the Stones River National Battlefield driving tour. 
The Committee encourages the park to seek non-Federal 
assistance to help complete its project.
    The Committee has provided $175,000 to initiate planning 
for a museum concept plan for the Wilson's Creek NB Sweeney 
museum collection. The region should consider this a high 
priority project and continue to provide funds in future budget 
requests for this effort. Also provided is $250,000 to complete 
planning associated with the Manhattan Project Sites study.
    The Committee has provided $3,000,000 to undertake the most 
essential deferred maintenance requirements at Wolf Trap 
National Park for the Performing Arts. The Committee cautions 
the Service that prior to beginning any expenditure of these 
funds, the Service should develop a planned program of 
expenditures, in priority order, focused on health and safety 
improvements, code compliance, and utility upgrades. The 
Committee expects the plan to represent a stand-alone set of 
work that can be accomplished within the funds provided and 
that is not dependent on subsequent appropriations. If 
additional enhancements at the park are deemed a priority to 
accomplish the mission, the Service and the Wolf Trap 
Foundation should consider a capital improvement partnership 
agreement, in accordance with the new partnership construction 
process. The Committee should be consulted prior to any 
agreements being signed.
    The Committee has not provided funds for two Lake Mead NRA 
projects included in the budget request. These projects should 
be funded with the receipts from the Southern Nevada Public 
Lands Management Act.
    The Committee is aware of proposals by Gateway National 
Recreation Area to improve the recreation playing fields and 
comfort stations at Miller Field and Great Kills. The Committee 
is supportive of improving the outdoor recreation opportunities 
at this park and directs the Service to develop a plan for 
phased implementation of the most critical improvements needed. 
Once a plan is developed, the Committee will be able to 
consider the funding requirements needed to initiate site-
specific pre-design.
    The Committee is aware of the significant interest in 
greater New Bedford in the plan to initiate a comprehensive 
ethnographic study of the park and its surroundings in order to 
develop a better understanding of the roles that the area's 
various communities and neighborhoods played in the history of 
the whaling industry. The Service is directed to initiate this 
study within available funds.
    The Committee expects planning for restoration of the Bodie 
Island Lighthouse to be completed toward the end of fiscal year 
2006. The Service should request construction funds when 
appropriate.

                    LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND

                              (RESCISSION)




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      -$30,000,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       -30,000,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       -30,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends the rescission of $30,000,000 in 
the annual contract authority provided by 16 U.S.C. 460l-10a. 
This authority has not been used in years, and there are no 
plans to use it in fiscal year 2006.

                 LAND ACQUISITION AND STATE ASSISTANCE




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $146,349,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        54,467,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         9,421,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................      -136,928,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       -45,046,000


    The Committee recommends $9,421,000 for land acquisition 
and State assistance, a decrease of $45,046,000 below the 
budget request and $136,928,000 below the enacted level. Within 
the funds provided, $1,587,000 is for assistance to States for 
administrative expenses, and $7,834,000 is for Federal land 
acquisition program activities, including $4,000,000 for 
emergencies and hardships, $9,749,000 for acquisition 
management, and $4,000,000 for inholdings. The Committee 
recommendation includes the use of $9,915,000 in prior year 
funds from the Cat Island project at Gulf Islands National 
Seashore. Negotiations for this acquisition have been ongoing 
since March 2002. Funds were appropriated in fiscal years 2003 
and 2004, and the Service, the property owner, and the Trust 
for Public Land have been unable to reach agreement on the 
terms and conditions of the acquisition or on an appraisal, 
both necessary precursors to an agreement on valuation and 
cost. Because of these delays, the Committee is redirecting 
these funds to urgently needed park base increases.

                    United States Geological Survey

    The United States Geological Survey was established by an 
act of Congress on March 3, 1879 to provide a permanent Federal 
agency to conduct the systematic and scientific 
``classification of the public lands, and examination of the 
geological structure, mineral resources, and products of the 
National domain''. The USGS is the Federal government's largest 
earth-science research agency, the Nation's largest civilian 
mapmaking agency, and the primary source of data on the 
Nation's surface and ground water resources. Its activities 
include conducting detailed assessments of the energy and 
mineral potential of the Nation's land and offshore areas; 
investigating and issuing warnings of earthquakes, volcanic 
eruptions, landslides, and other geologic and hydrologic 
hazards; research on the geologic structure of the Nation; 
studies of the geologic features, structure, processes, and 
history of other planets of our solar system; topographic 
surveys of the Nation and preparation of topographic and 
thematic maps and related cartographic products; development 
and production of digital cartographic databases 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, 2005...........................      $936,464,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       933,515,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       974,586,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       +38,122,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +41,071,000


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


    The Committee recommends $974,586,000 for surveys, 
investigations, and research, an increase of $41,071,000 above 
the budget request and $38,122,000 above the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level.
    National Mapping Program.--The Committee recommends 
$133,203,000 for the national mapping program, $250,000 below 
the budget request and $14,452,000 above the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level. The change to the request is a reduction of 
$250,000 for the science impact proposal.
    The Committee commends the Survey and the Administration 
for finally providing a detailed proposal to continue existing 
Landsat satellite operations and implement the Landsat Data 
Continuity Mission, which will place the next generation 
Landsat sensor in orbit. Long-term remote sensing data are 
vital to many aspects of the government and private sector and 
are strongly supported by this Committee.
    Geologic Hazards, Resources and Processes.--The Committee 
recommends $239,246,000 for geologic hazards, resources, and 
processes, $31,110,000 above the budget request and $8,752,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Changes from the 
request include increases of $250,000 for the global dust 
study, $1,248,000 for Florida shelf research, $28,478,000 for 
mineral research and assessments and $1,134,000 for Alaska 
mineral resource assessments.
    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.
    Water Resources Investigations.--The Committee recommends 
$211,751,000 for water resources investigations, $7,580,000 
above the budget request and $551,000 above the fiscal year 
2005 enacted level. Changes from the request include $230,000 
for the base toxic hydrology program, $100,000 for the Hood 
Canal dissolved oxygen study, $750,000 for the San Pedro 
partnership, and $6,500,000 for the water resource research 
institutes.
    The Committee is concerned with reports that suggest that 
the Water Resource Division (WRD) of the Survey is providing or 
seeking to provide a variety of commercial services to Federal 
and non-Federal entities in direct competition with the private 
sector. The Committee strongly discourages WRD from providing 
commercially available services to Federal and non-Federal 
entities through its cooperative water program unless these 
services are performed by a private sector firm under contract 
with the Survey or the entity with which the Survey has entered 
into a cooperative agreement. The Committee encourages the 
Survey to focus its efforts on carrying out its important 
mission of serving as a national database for hydrologic data, 
theory, and research. The Survey should submit a report to the 
House Committee on Appropriations by December 31, 2005, 
regarding its past, present and future efforts to avoid 
competing with the private sector.
    The Committee agrees with the proposed increase for the 
water availability project. The Committee expects the Survey to 
continue with this important program and establish a second 
pilot project, as outlined in the Survey's November 2003 
implementation plan. The Committee urges the Administration to 
request funding in future budgets to expand this program for 
other areas of the Country.
    Biological Research.--The Committee recommends $174,765,000 
for biological research, $1,840,000 above the budget request 
and $3,066,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. 
Changes to the request include increases of $1,430,000 for the 
Great Lakes Science Center for safety needs associated with the 
docking of the research vessel Kiyi, $150,000 for invasive 
species database coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, $500,000 for manatee research, $335,000 for equipment 
at the anadromous fish lab, $250,000 for the Tunison lab, 
$175,000 for the Potomac snakehead program, $200,000 for the 
Upper Midwest Environmental Science Center, $400,000 to restore 
funding for the Nebraska Fish and Wildlife Cooperative Unit, 
and decreases of $550,000 for the science on the DOI landscape 
initiative, $750,000 for Glen Canyon adaptive management, and 
$300,000 for invasive species.
    Enterprise Information.--The Committee recommends 
$47,087,000 for enterprise information, $680,000 below the 
budget request, and $2,714,000 above the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level. The change to the budget request is a decrease 
of $680,000 for the ``disaster.gov'' initiative.
    Science Support.--The Committee recommends $72,337,000 for 
science support, the same as the budget request and $6,753,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
    Facilities.--The Committee recommends $96,197,000 for 
facilities, $1,471,000 above the budget request and $1,586,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The change to the 
request is an increase of $1,471,000 to restore rental payments 
associated with the mineral assessments program.
    Bill Language.--Language is included in Title IV--General 
Provisions concerning egovernment initiatives and competitive 
sourcing studies.

                      Minerals Management Service

    The Minerals Management Service is responsible for 
collecting, distributing, accounting and auditing revenues from 
mineral leases on Federal and Indian lands. In fiscal year 
2005, MMS expects to collect and distribute about $9.5 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. The MMS also operates the Interior Franchise 
Fund: the entrepreneurial GovWorks enterprise provides 
important procurement services to a variety of governmental 
agencies.

                ROYALTY AND OFFSHORE MINERALS MANAGEMENT




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $166,820,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       160,416,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       152,676,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -14,144,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        -7,740,000


    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 $152,676,000 
for royalty and offshore minerals management, a decrease of 
$7,740,000 below the budget request and $14,144,000 below the 
2005 enacted level. In addition, the Committee recommends use 
of $122,730,000 in receipts, which agrees with the 
Administration request to increase receipts and fees by 
$19,000,000. The Committee recommendation provides for the 
requested activities with two exceptions noted below, and 
provides small increases for fixed costs. The Committee has 
recommended bill language which allows the royalty-in-kind 
(RIK) program to continue hereafter; this allows the MMS to 
recover transportation costs, salaries, and other 
administrative costs directly related to the royalty-in-kind 
program. Therefore, the $9,800,000 requested for the Strategic 
Petroleum Reserve to the RIK conversion initiative and the CAM 
program funding initiative are not included in the 
appropriation. The Committee encourages the MMS to establish 
multi-year agreements for RIK transportation and processing, if 
advantageous to the Federal government.
    Bill Language.--Language is included earmarking $77,529,000 
for royalty management activities, a decrease of $9,800,000 
below the request and an increase of $2,112,000 above the 
enacted level.

                           OIL SPILL RESEARCH




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $7,006,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         7,006,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         7,006,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $7,006,000 to be derived from the 
Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, to conduct oil spill research 
and financial responsibility and inspection activities 
associated with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, Public Law 101-
380. The Committee recommendation is equal to the budget 
request and the fiscal year 2005 level.

          OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT

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

                       REGULATION AND TECHNOLOGY




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $108,368,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       110,535,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       110,535,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +2,167,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $110,535,000, the budget request, 
for regulation and technology, including the use of $100,000 in 
civil penalty collections. This is $2,167,000 above the 2005 
level. The increase is to offset partially increases in 
uncontrollable costs for States and the OSM and for other 
requested activities.

                    ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $188,205,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       246,014,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       188,014,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          -191,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       -58,000,000


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


    The Committee recommends $188,014,000 for the abandoned 
mine reclamation fund, $58,000,000 below the budget request and 
$191,000 below the fiscal year 2005 level. The recommendation 
does not include the requested allocation of $58,000,000 to 
implement the Administration's legislative proposal which would 
return the State share balances to certified States. The 
recommendation includes other aspects of the Administration 
request under this heading. The Committee has retained 
language, as in past years, which limits funding for minimum 
program States to $1,500,000. The Committee recommendation does 
not include the special authority for Maryland grants.
    The Committee has included language which transfers the 
balance in the fund for the rural abandoned mine program 
(RAMP), which has not been used for 10 years, to the Federal 
share fund, so the funds could be used in the future for 
emergencies and other Federal obligations.
    The Committee sees merit in the Administration's previous 
legislative proposal to extend and modify the Surface Mining 
Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA). The Committee notes that 
legislative action is still pending, so funds are not included 
at this time for its implementation. The Committee encourages 
the authorizing committees to act on this reasonable 
legislative proposal, which would increase the rate at which 
dangerous abandoned sites would be reclaimed; do so at a lower 
cost; and provide a fair and reasonable method of compensating 
Wyoming and other governments, which have completed abandoned 
coal mine reclamation. Absent legislative action, existing law 
will allow continued distribution of AML funds to States in a 
manner similar to that which occurred in fiscal year 2005.

                        Bureau of Indian Affairs

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

                      OPERATION OF INDIAN PROGRAMS




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................    $1,926,091,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................     1,924,230,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................     1,992,737,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       +66,646,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +68,507,000


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


    The Committee recommends $1,992,737,000 for the operation 
of Indian programs, $68,507,000 above the budget request and 
$66,646,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
    The Committee agrees with the Bureau that an alternative 
budget structure for the operation of Indian programs is badly 
needed. The current budget structure is confusing and complex 
and offers little opportunity to review funding levels and 
assess performance on a programmatic level. However, the 
Committee is concerned that there was inadequate consultation 
with Tribes when preparing this new budget structure. The 
Committee is also concerned that the process of making 
budgetary data available to Tribes is inadequate.
    The Committee directs the Bureau to do the following:
    1. Consult with Tribal leaders on an alternative budget 
structure that is: (1) aligned programmatically, (2) provides 
full transparency for Tribal priority allocations funding, (3) 
increases accountability for Bureau programs and program 
managers, and (4) clearly delineates funding levels of the 
central and regional offices. The Committee expects a progress 
report by October 31, 2005. The Committee directs the Bureau to 
submit a revised budget structure as a part of the fiscal year 
2007 budget justification.
    2. Develop an internet website, hosted by the Office of the 
Secretary, that: (1) allows Tribes to access Bureau of Indian 
Affairs and Office of Special Trustee budget information, (2) 
displays the distribution of funding that affects Indian 
country, and (3) contains information and links to all Federal 
grant programs that provide funding for Indian country.
    3. Submit a report, by December 31, 2005, outlining the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs current process for consulting Tribes 
and Tribal leaders on administrative, funding, and operational 
changes to programs and projects.
    The Bureau's regulations prescribe detailed procedures for 
placing land into trust, including consideration of the impact 
on local tax revenues and jurisdictional conflicts that may 
arise. The Committee directs the Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to conduct a study of Bureau procedures and 
practices in implementing these regulations, including the role 
played by Tribes that contract with BIA to manage real estate 
service programs. The GAO should report to the House and Senate 
Committees on Appropriations no later than May 1, 2006. The 
Committee is aware that GAO studies can take time, and directs 
the GAO to undertake this study as soon as the Interior 
Appropriations bill passes the House floor.
    Tribal Priority Allocations.--The Committee recommends 
$778,609,000 for Tribal priority allocations, $17,920,000 above 
the request and $8,526,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted 
level. Changes from the budget request include increases of 
$1,500,000 for Indian Child Welfare Act activities, $6,420,000 
for welfare assistance, $8,838,000 for Johnson O'Malley 
assistance grants, and $1,162,000 for community fire 
protection.
    The funding increase for Indian Child Welfare Act 
activities should be used for counseling and after-school care 
programs for at-risk children.
    The Committee has restored the proposed reductions to the 
welfare assistance program, the Johnson O'Malley assistance 
grants, and the community fire protection program within the 
Tribal priority allocations. The Committee feels that the 
justification for the reductions--that there are other programs 
in the government that could provide these funds--is completely 
unfounded. The budget request provided no information to 
support claims that other funding sources are readily available 
to offset the reductions in this budget.
    Other Recurring Programs.--The Committee recommends 
$636,337,000 for other recurring programs, $34,036,000 above 
the budget request and $23,418,000 above the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level. Changes from the budget request include 
increases of $15,000,000 for Indian school equalization program 
(ISEP) formula funds, $3,360,000 to restore the early childhood 
development program, $5,000,000 for student transportation, 
$1,200,000 for irrigation operations and maintenance, 
$3,750,000 to partially restore the Washington timber-fish-
wildlife program, $1,806,000 for the Chippewa/Ottawa Resource 
Authority (CORA), $3,000,000 for the inter-tribal bison 
council, $320,000 for the Upper Columbia United Tribes, and 
$600,000 for the circle of flight program.
    The funding increase provided for the ISEP should be 
directed to basic educational programs, with one exception. The 
Committee directs the Bureau to provide $2,000,000 to the FOCUS 
program for assisting at-risk students, encouraging more 
parental participation in schools, and encouraging 
participation in after-school activities. The Committee directs 
the Bureau to report, by December 31, 2005, on the allocation 
and use of FOCUS funds.
    The funding increase in the irrigation operations and 
maintenance program is to upgrade irrigation systems for the 
Navajo Agriculture Products Industry. This funding is in 
addition to the base funding increase of $750,000 proposed in 
the budget for the Navajo irrigation project.
    Within the funding provided for the Washington timber-fish-
wildlife program, $1,000,000 should be used for the mass 
marking of salmon.
    Non Recurring Programs.--The Committee recommends 
$67,691,000 for nonrecurring programs, $2,366,000 above the 
budget request and $8,294,000 below the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level. The increases above the budget request are 
$396,000 for Seminole-Florida Everglades restoration and 
$1,970,000 to restore reductions to the endangered species 
program.
    Central Office Operations.--The Committee recommends 
$151,534,000 for central office operations, the same as the 
budget request and $11,513,000 above the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level. The Committee agrees with the requested increase 
for trust services to address the probate backlog.
    Regional Office Operations.--The Committee recommends 
$41,590,000 for regional office operations, the same as the 
budget request and $228,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted 
level.
    Special Programs and Pooled Overhead.--The Committee 
recommends $317,516,000 for special programs and pooled 
overhead, $14,185,000 above the budget request and $31,255,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Changes from the 
budget request include increases of $8,500,000 for law 
enforcement activities, $3,451,000 for the United Tribes 
Technical College, $1,726,000 for Crownpoint Institute and 
$508,000 for the National ironworkers training program.
    The funding increases provided for law enforcement should 
be used for high priority law enforcement needs in Indian 
country including, but not limited to, community policing 
programs and drug enforcement. None of these funds should be 
retained by the central or regional offices for administrative 
activities. The Bureau should provide the Committee with a 
report detailing the use of these funds by December 31, 2005.
    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 in 
budget requests 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 over 
funding formulas.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $319,129,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       232,137,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       284,137,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -34,992,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +52,000,000


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


    The Committee recommends $284,137,000 for construction, 
$52,000,000 above the budget request and $34,992,000 below the 
fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
    Education.--The Committee recommends $225,875,000 for 
education construction, $52,000,000 above the budget request 
and $37,497,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. 
Changes from the budget request include increases of 
$32,000,000 for replacement school construction, $1,000,000 for 
employee housing, and $19,000,000 for facilities improvement 
and repair.
    The Committee is concerned about the reduction to Indian 
school construction and repair. This Committee has made 
substantial progress in replacing Indian schools, but much 
remains to be done. The Committee does not agree that the 
Bureau needs to reduce funding for new schools to finish 
ongoing projects. The Committee has restored a portion of the 
funding and directs the Bureau to proceed with the construction 
of the next schools on the Bureau's priority list. The 
Committee has also included an increase to the school 
maintenance and repair program that should be used to address 
the most immediate health and safety maintenance needs in 
Bureau schools.
    Public Safety and Justice.--The Committee recommends 
$11,777,000 for public safety and justice construction, the 
same as the budget request and $4,396,000 above the 2005 
enacted level.
    Resources Management.--The Committee recommends $38,272,000 
for resources management construction, the same as the budget 
request and $2,017,000 below the 2005 enacted level.
    General Administration and Construction Management.--The 
Committee recommends $8,213,000 for general administration and 
construction management, the same as the budget request and 
$126,000 above the 2005 enacted level.

 INDIAN LAND AND WATER CLAIM SETTLEMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS PAYMENTS TO 
                                INDIANS




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $44,150,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        24,754,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        34,754,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        -9,396,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +10,000,000


    The Committee recommends $34,754,000 for Indian land and 
water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to Indians, 
$10,000,000 above the budget request and $9,396,000 below the 
2005 enacted level. Funding includes $634,000 for the White 
Earth land settlement, $254,000 for the Hoopa-Yurok, $144,000 
for Pyramid Lake, $8,111,000 for Colorado Ute, $10,167,000 for 
Cherokee, Choctaw and Chickasaw settlement, $10,000,000 for the 
Quinault settlement, and $5,444,000 for the Zuni Water 
settlement.
    Bill Language.--Language is included under Indian Land and 
Water Claims Settlements providing $10,000,000 for payment to 
the Quinault Indian Nation for the north boundary settlement 
agreement.

                 INDIAN GUARANTEED LOAN PROGRAM ACCOUNT




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $6,332,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         6,348,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         6,348,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................           +16,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $6,348,000 for the Indian 
guaranteed loan program account, the same as the budget request 
and $16,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.

                          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 Marianas Islands 
(CNMI) and also the three freely associated States: the 
Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Republic of the 
Marshall Islands (RMI) and the Republic of Palau. The permanent 
and trust fund payments to the territories and the compact 
nations provide substantial financial resources to these 
governments. During fiscal year 2004 new financial arrangements 
for the Compacts of Free Association with the FSM and the RMI 
were implemented; this also included mandatory payments for 
certain activities previously provided in discretionary 
appropriations as well as Compact impact payments of 
$30,000,000 per year split among Guam, CNMI, AS, and Hawaii.

                       ASSISTANCE TO TERRITORIES




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $75,581,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        74,263,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        76,563,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +982,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        +2,300,000


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


    The Committee recommends $76,563,000 for assistance to 
territories, $982,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level and 
$2,300,000 above the budget request.
    Territorial Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$25,733,000 for territorial assistance, $651,000 above the 
fiscal year 2005 level and $2,300,000 above the budget request. 
Increases to the budget request include $500,000 for additional 
oversight of the implementation of the Compacts of Free 
Association, $800,000 for payments to replace the Prior Service 
Trust Fund, and $1,000,000 to continue health care programs in 
the RMI. The Committee directs that technical assistance grant 
support to the Pacific Basin Development Commission be 
maintained at no less than the fiscal year 2005 level.
    The Committee recommends an additional $500,000 to the 
Office of Insular Affairs subactivity to support oversight of 
the implementation of the Compacts of Free Association, 
including at least one additional position and increased 
oversight travel funds for the Honolulu Field Office and 
additional support at headquarters. The Committee notes that 
the field office is charged with managing over $114,000,000 in 
Compact sector grant funds, and was given an additional 
responsibility of managing the $18,000,000 Supplemental 
Education Grant program which replaced Federal programs. 
Although the Office of Insular Affairs is working diligently 
with five Honolulu-based and two in-country grant managers, the 
Committee has determined that additional funding for oversight 
and management is essential. This is especially true for the 
education sector, which currently has one manager to oversee 
$57,000,000 in grants to both the FSM and RMI. The Committee 
expects the Department to continue reviewing funding and 
staffing levels for Compact oversight so the Department can 
assure the Congress and the American public that all compact 
grants funds are used appropriately for high priority needs.
    The Committee reiterates its support for the agreement 
among the pension systems of the Republic of Palau, the CNMI, 
the RMI, and the FSM 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 directs the Department to continue 
to work with the Board of Directors of the Prior Service 
Benefits Trust Fund and the directors of each pension system to 
ensure that the agreements are implemented and that prior 
service benefits can be paid to the enrollees. The Committee 
also directs that this funding be reprogrammed for general 
technical assistance uses if there is a failure to fully 
implement the new agreement.
    The Committee has also included $1,000,000 for continuation 
of health care programs in the RMI. 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.
    The Committee notes that the OIA spent $655,000 on two 
business development conferences in Los Angeles. This required 
about 4,000 OIA FTE hours and extensive contractor involvement; 
13 staff from DC and OIA field offices in American Samoa and 
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands traveled to 
Los Angeles for the conference. The Committee directs the OIA 
to provide the House and Senate Appropriations Committees 
project cost plans before and after similar future conferences, 
as well as for the future ``Business Opportunities Missions''. 
It is imperative that these economic development efforts be 
reasonable and cost effective given the great need for 
technical assistance in the territories.
    American Samoa.--The Committee recommends $23,110,000 for 
American Samoa operations as requested, an increase of $331,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 level.
    The Committee has reviewed recent work by the GAO 
concerning accountability for key Federal grants to American 
Samoa. Through Presidential delegation, the Secretary of the 
Interior exercises ultimate control and responsibility for, and 
has authority to take a proactive role in, the administration 
of the Territory of American Samoa. The Committee urges the 
Secretary to use this authority to coordinate with all Federal 
agencies that award funds to American Samoa and to encourage 
the other agencies to consider designating American Samoa a 
high-risk grantee under the Grants Management Common Rule. A 
coordinated approach to designation could include a common, 
basic set of special conditions to be applied by all Federal 
grant awarding agencies to grants to American Samoa. The 
designation could also include a basic set of corrective 
actions that American Samoa must take, including earning clean 
single audit opinions for two consecutive years before the 
special conditions are removed.
    The Committee also notes that the Lyndon B. Johnson 
Tropical Medical Center's poor physical infrastructure weakens 
its ability to deliver a minimum standard of care to the 
population of American Samoa. The Committee urges the Secretary 
to coordinate with other Federal agencies to resolve 
infrastructure and safety deficiencies at this Center to ensure 
continued Federal funding for the island's only medical service 
provider. The Committee directs the Secretary to designate an 
additional $2,000,000 to the Center's base budget from the 
total operations grants made available to the American Samoa 
Government, to be used to help alleviate the shortages of 
medicines and medical supplies at the Center. The Committee 
also urges the Secretary to clearly assign staff responsibility 
for coordinating Federal activities in American Samoa.
    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 2005 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 court-ordered infrastructure projects in the 
respective territories.

                      COMPACT OF FREE ASSOCIATION




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $5,450,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         4,862,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         5,362,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................           -88,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................          +500,000


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


    The Committee recommends $5,362,000 for the compact of free 
association, $500,000 above the budget request and $88,000 
below the fiscal year 2005 level. The Committee recommendation 
continues Enewetak support.

                        Departmental Management


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $95,821,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       120,155,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       118,755,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       +22,934,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        -1,400,000


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


    The Committee recommends $118,755,000 for salaries and 
expenses for departmental management, a decrease of $1,400,000 
below the budget request and $22,934,000 above the 2005 enacted 
level. Changes from the budget request include decreases of 
$500,000 for Take Pride in America, $700,000 for law 
enforcement and security, and $200,000 for partnership 
training. Departmental programs that are denied requested 
increases in this appropriation should not be augmented with 
staffing and funds from individual bureaus or any other source 
to achieve the requested level of activity.
    Land Appraisal Consolidation.--The Committee has gone along 
with the consolidation of bureau-level appraisal offices into a 
central, Department-level office. However, the Committee was 
led to believe that this consolidation would result in 
significant cost savings. The Committee approves the budget 
request increase of $7,441,000 for appraisal services, but 
expects future budget requests to contain increases for fixed 
costs only.
    Partnership Training.--The Committee has denied funding for 
partnership training.
    Bill Language.--Language is included in General Provisions, 
Department of the Interior, which limits the number of FTEs to 
34 and detailees to 8 in the Office of Law Enforcement and 
Security. Since the tragedy of September 11, 2001, the 
Committee has responded to the need for stronger emergency 
response and coordination among the Interior Department's 
bureaus. Significant funds have been provided to the individual 
bureaus to supplement their security needs. The Committee 
believes that the level specified in the bill language is 
sufficient, given tight fiscal constraints, to deal with 
security needs.

                       PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES

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





Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $226,805,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       200,000,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       230,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +3,195,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +30,000,000


    The Committee recommends $230,000,000 for PILT, $30,000,000 
above the budget request and $3,195,000 above the fiscal year 
2005 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. The 
fund includes sums recovered from or paid by a party as 
reimbursement for remedial action or response activities.





Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $9,855,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         9,855,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         9,855,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $9,855,000, the same as the budget 
request and the fiscal year 2005 enacted level, for the central 
hazardous materials fund. This account was previously located 
in the Bureau of Land Management.

                        Office of the Solicitor


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES





Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $51,656,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        55,752,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        55,340,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +3,684,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................          -412,000


    The Committee recommends $55,340,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Office of the Solicitor, a decrease of $412,000 
below the budget request and an increase of $3,684,000 above 
the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Changes from the budget 
request include decreases of $207,000 for support for legal 
staff, $200,000 for two additional FOIA appeals support 
positions, and $5,000 for training, audit, and evaluation. 
Departmental programs that are denied requested increases in 
this appropriation should not be augmented with staffing and 
funds from individual bureaus or any other source to achieve 
the requested level of activity.

                      Office of Inspector General


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES





Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $37,275,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        40,999,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        39,566,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +2,291,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        -1,433,000


    The Committee recommends $39,566,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Office of Inspector General, a decrease of 
$1,433,000 below the budget request and an increase of 
$2,291,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Changes 
from the budget request include decreases of $470,000 for two 
FTEs and PCS moves for the Office of Evaluations and Quick 
Response, $750,000 for five FTEs for investigations, $100,000 
for IT standardization, accreditation, and equipment, $59,000 
for security clearances, and $54,000 for mentor program 
training. Departmental programs that are denied requested 
increases in this appropriation should not be augmented with 
staffing and funds from individual bureaus or any other source 
to achieve the requested level of activity.

             Office of 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 45 million acres 
owned by Indian Tribes. On these lands, Interior manages over 
100,000 leases for individual Indians and Tribes. Leasing, use 
permits, sale revenues, and interest of approximately $192 
million per year are collected for approximately 245,000 
individual Indian money accounts, and about $414 million per 
year is collected for about 1,400 Tribal accounts per year. In 
addition, the trust manages approximately $3 billion in Tribal 
funds and $400 million in individual Indian funds.

                         FEDERAL TRUST PROGRAMS




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $193,540,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       269,397,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       191,593,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        -1,947,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       -77,804,000



    The Committee recommends $193,593,000 for the Office of 
Special Trustee for American Indians, $77,804,000 below the 
budget request and $1,947,000 below the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level.
    Program operations, support, and improvements.--The 
Committee recommends $189,361,000 for program operations, 
support and improvements, $77,804,000 below the budget request 
and $1,963,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The 
reduction is for historical accounting.
    The Committee has included the requested funds in the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs and Office of Special Trustee for 
trust management reform and improving trust systems, and has 
continued historical accounting activities at the fiscal year 
2005 level. The Committee does not agree to the large increase 
requested in historical accounting and has shifted this funding 
to help offset the reductions proposed in the Administration's 
request to Indian education and health care.
    Executive Direction.--The Committee recommends $2,232,000 
for executive direction, the same as the budget request, and 
$16,000 above the 2005 enacted level.
    Since 1996, the committee has appropriated hundreds of 
millions of dollars for activities related to the Cobell v. 
Norton litigation. The Committee feels very strongly that these 
funds could have been better used to fund greatly needed health 
and education programs in Indian country. The Committee 
believes that this case must be resolved without negatively 
impacting future funding levels for Indian programs in this 
bill. The Committee recognizes that, in addition to mediation 
talks that have taken place in the last year, the House and 
Senate authorizing committees have made commitments to develop 
a comprehensive legislative solution to this ongoing problem.
    The Committee rejects the notion that, in passing the 
American Indian Trust Management Reform Act of 1994, Congress 
had any intent of ordering an historical accounting on the 
scale of that which continues to be ordered by the Court. Such 
an undertaking would certainly be a poor use of Federal and 
trust resources.
    Bill Language.--As in fiscal year 2005 and 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 $58,000,000. 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, 2005...........................       $34,514,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        34,514,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        34,514,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $34,514,000 for Indian land 
consolidation, the budget request and the fiscal year 2005 
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 2005, 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, 2005...........................        $5,737,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         6,106,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         6,106,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +369,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $6,106,000, the budget request, 
for the natural resource damage assessment fund, an increase of 
$369,000 above the fiscal year 2005 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) leasing activities in certain 
areas. These OCS provisions are addressed under the Minerals 
Management Service.
    Section 107 prohibits the National Park Service from 
reducing recreation fees for non-local travel through any park 
unit.
    Section 108 permits the transfer of funds between the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee for 
American Indians.
    Section 109 continues a provision allowing the hiring of 
administrative law judges to address the Indian probate 
backlog.
    Section 110 continues a provision permitting the 
redistribution of tribal priority allocation and tribal base 
funds to alleviate funding inequities.
    Section 111 continues a provision requiring the allocation 
of Bureau of Indian Affairs postsecondary schools funds 
consistent with unmet needs.
    Section 112 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 113 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 114 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 115 continues a provision prohibiting the closure 
of the underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns NP, NM.
    Section 116 continues a provision preventing the demolition 
of a bridge between New Jersey and Ellis Island.
    Section 117 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 118 continues a provision allowing the Secretary to 
pay private attorney fees for employees and former employees in 
connection with Cobell v. Norton.
    Section 119 continues a provision dealing with the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service's responsibilities for mass marking 
of salmonid stocks.
    Section 120 requires the use of Departmental Management 
funds for operational needs at the Midway Atoll National 
Wildlife Refuge airport.
    Section 121 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 122 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
funds to study or implement a plan to drain or reduce water 
levels in Lake Powell.
    Section 123 allows the National Indian Gaming Commission to 
collect $12,000,000 in fees for fiscal year 2006.
    Section 124 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 125 provides for the renewal of certain grazing 
permits in the Jarbidge Field office of the Bureau of Land 
Management.
    Section 126 authorizes the acquisition of lands and leases 
for Ellis Island.
    Section 127 permits the Secretary of the Interior to issue 
grazing permits within the Mojave National Preserve.
    Section 128 implements rules concerning winter snowmobile 
use on Yellowstone National Park.
    Section 129 limits the use of funds for staffing for the 
Department of Interior's Office of Law Enforcement and 
Security.

               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 2006, the Committee recommends 
$7,708,027,000 for the Environmental Protection Agency, a 
decrease of $318,458,000 below the fiscal year 2005 level and 
$187,427,000 above the budget request. Changes to the budget 
request are detailed in each of the appropriation accounts.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. In 2001, the EPA requested that the National Academy of 
Sciences review the situation regarding the use of human 
studies. In its 2005 report, the Committee urged EPA to 
consider the Academy's recommendations on the use of human 
volunteer studies in its regulatory programs. EPA is currently 
following the Academy's recommendations on the use of human 
volunteer studies and, on February 8, 2005, issued a Federal 
Register notice clarifying its policy. The notice outlines 
EPA's plans for rulemaking. The Committee commends EPA for its 
clarification of policy with respect to human studies and will 
continue to monitor the Agency's efforts in this area.
    2. The Committee continues to be concerned that unclear 
regulations, conflicting court decisions, and inadequate 
scientific information are creating confusion about the extent 
to which reporting requirements in the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and the 
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act cover 
emissions from poultry, dairy, or livestock operations. 
Producers want to meet their environmental obligations but need 
clarification from the Environmental Protection Agency on 
whether these laws apply to their operations. The Committee 
believes that an expeditious resolution of this matter is 
warranted.
    3. The Committee expects the EPA to prepare its fiscal year 
2007 budget justification in the order specified in the table 
accompanying this report and to delineate clearly the 
differences between the fiscal year 2006 enacted level and the 
fiscal year 2007 request for each activity. The Committee 
recommends discontinuing the annual operating plan beginning in 
fiscal year 2006. The Committee has approved the fiscal year 
2005 operating plan.
    4. The Committee generally has provided funding for fixed 
cost increases, as requested, including pay costs, rent, 
utilities, and security. The Committee has also agreed to many 
of the proposed realignments of programs. EPA should only make 
further adjustments, consistent with the requirements of the 
reprogramming guidelines contained in the front of this report. 
Also, in accordance with the reprogramming guidelines, the 
Committee should be notified regarding reorganizations of 
offices, programs, or activities prior to the planned 
implementation of such reorganizations.
    5. The EPA should review the distribution of funds among 
regions and make adjustments, as needed, to ensure that funding 
is strategically aligned to meet the highest priority needs.
    6. EPA should establish and enforce, through the Office of 
Environmental Information, an information technology management 
policy with an emphasis on standardization across all of EPA.

                         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, 2005...........................      $744,061,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       760,640,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       765,340,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       +21,279,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        +4,700,000


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


    The Committee recommends $765,340,000 for science and 
technology, an increase of $21,279,000 above the fiscal year 
2005 level and $4,700,000 above the budget request. In 
addition, the Committee recommends that $30,606,000, as 
requested, 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 $7,000,000 for Federal support for the air toxics 
program.
    Climate Protection Program.--The Committee recommends an 
increase of $2,300,000 for the climate protection program. 
Direction on the use of these funds is provided below.
    Homeland Security.--The Committee recommends a decrease of 
$35,000,000 for Water Sentinel and related training, and a 
decrease of $8,000,000 in preparedness, response, and recovery 
for the decontamination program. While the amount provided is 
less than the budget request, there is an increase above the 
fiscal year 2005 level for these programs.
    Research: Congressional Priorities.--The Committee 
recommends an increase of $40,000,000 for programs of national 
and regional significance that have been funded through this 
program/project in at least 3 of the last 4 years. Direction on 
the use of these funds is provided below.
    Human Health and Ecosystems.--The Committee recommends a 
net increase of $12,400,000 for human health and ecosystems 
including a decrease of $1,200,000 for computational toxicology 
and increases of $1,900,000 for endocrine disruptor research, 
$3,700,000 for fellowships through the Science to Achieve 
Results program, and $8,000,000 for other human health and 
ecosystems research of which $4,000,000 is for exploratory 
grants, $2,900,000 is for ecosystem protection research, 
$600,000 is for aggregate risk research, and $500,000 is for 
condition assessments of estuaries in the Gulf of Mexico.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. EPA is encouraged to increase its use of private sector 
capability in the clean automotive technology program. The 
increase provided for the climate protection program is to 
ensure that not less than $10,000,000 is used for competitively 
awarded contract research and engineering services and 
activities. The private sector has significant research 
capability that is used by EPA through this program, to develop 
clean, cost effective, highly fuel-efficient engines and 
powertrain technologies.
    2. The EPA should develop clear goals and milestones for 
the Water Sentinel program, including the use of real-time 
monitoring; seek the advice of the Science Advisory Board; and 
justify more clearly the funding request for the program, in 
the context of the overall plan, in the fiscal year 2007 budget 
request.
    3. The Committee does not agree with the transfer of 
research funds to the Office of Air and Radiation, the Office 
of Water, the Solid Waste and Emergency Response program, and 
the Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances program. The 
Office of Research and Development should coordinate closely 
with these offices on their research needs. There should be an 
emphasis on using the Science to Achieve Results grants program 
whenever practicable.
    4. The Committee has included $40,000,000 for Programs of 
National and Regional Significance with the expectation that 
the EPA will conduct a competitive solicitation among programs 
that have been added by the Congress to the Science and 
Technology account in at least 3 of the last 4 years. The 
Committee notes that many of these Congressional priorities 
provide invaluable assistance to the EPA and are performed at a 
cost substantially less than if EPA were to institute such 
programs in-house. A competitive solicitation should ensure 
that the highest priority national and regional programs 
continue to be funded.

                 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, 2005...........................    $2,294,902,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................     2,353,764,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................     2,389,491,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       +94,589,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +35,727,000


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


    The Committee recommends $2,389,491,000 for environmental 
programs and management, an increase of $94,589,000 above the 
fiscal year 2005 level and $35,727,000 above the budget 
request. Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
    Brownfields.--The Committee recommends a decrease of 
$5,000,000 for Brownfields support.
    Air Toxics and Quality.--The Committee recommends a net 
decrease of $6,800,000 for air toxics and quality, including a 
decrease of $5,000,000 in Federal support for air quality 
management for the clean diesel initiative, an increase of 
$1,200,000 for stratospheric ozone/domestic programs, and a 
decrease of $3,000,000 for stratospheric ozone/multilateral 
fund.
    Climate Protection.--The Committee recommends a decrease of 
$4,000,000 for climate protection, including decreases of 
$500,000 for Energy Star and $3,500,000 for the methane to 
markets initiative.
    Compliance.--The Committee recommends a decrease of 
$2,900,000 for compliance monitoring, including decreases of 
$1,800,000 to reduce the rescission-related restoration 
proposed in the budget and $1,100,000 for regional program 
support.
    Enforcement.--The Committee recommends a decrease of 
$4,000,000 for enforcement, including decreases of $3,000,000 
for civil enforcement and $1,000,000 for criminal enforcement.
    Environmental Protection: Congressional Priorities.--The 
Committee recommends an increase of $40,000,000 for programs of 
national and regional significance that have been funded 
through this program/project in at least 3 of the last 4 years. 
Direction on the use of these funds is provided below. The 
Committee notes that the National Rural Water Association 
program has been moved to the Water: Health Protection/Drinking 
Water Programs portion of the environmental programs and 
management account.
    Geographic Programs.--The Committee recommends a net 
decrease of $2,532,000 for geographic programs, including 
increases of $1,045,000 for Lake Champlain, $1,523,000 for Long 
Island Sound, and $2,000,000 for Puget Sound, and decreases of 
$6,000,000 for community action for a renewed environment and 
$1,100,000 for regional geographic initiatives.
    Information Exchange/Outreach.--The Committee recommends a 
net increase of $5,000,000 for information exchange/outreach, 
including an increase of $9,000,000 for environmental education 
and a decrease of $4,000,000 for the exchange network.
    Information Technology/Data Management.--The Committee 
recommends a decrease of $10,000,000 for information 
technology/data management. A large amount of funding for these 
activities was transferred to the compliance program in the 
budget request. After accounting for that transfer, the 
Committee's recommendation provides an increase above the 
fiscal year 2005 level for data system improvements.
    Operations and Administration.--The Committee recommends a 
decrease of $5,000,000 for facilities infrastructure and 
operations.
    Pesticide Licensing.--The Committee recommends a decrease 
of $3,041,000 for pesticides: review/reregistration of existing 
pesticides, which leaves an increase of $3,635,000 above the 
enacted level.
    Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.--The Committee 
recommends a general reduction of $5,000,000 for RCRA 
activities. The Committee notes that, after this reduction, the 
Agency will retain an increase of nearly $3,000,000 above the 
fiscal year 2005 level. The increase above the enacted level 
should be used for the highest priority activities.
    Toxics Risk Review and Prevention.--The Committee 
recommends a net decrease of $1,000,000 for toxics risk review 
and prevention, including an increase of $1,000,000 for 
chemical risk review and a decrease of $2,000,000 for the 
pollution prevention program.
    Water: Ecosystems.--The Committee recommends a net decrease 
of $17,000,000 for water/ecosystems, including a decrease of 
$22,000,000 for Great Lakes Legacy Act programs (which leaves 
an increase of 25 percent above the fiscal year 2005 level) and 
an increase of $5,000,000 for the National Estuary Program. 
Direction on both of these programs is provided below.
    Water: Human Health Protection.--The Committee recommends a 
net increase of $7,000,000 for water/human health protection, 
including a decrease of $3,000,000 for drinking water programs 
and an increase of $10,000,000 for the National Rural Water 
Association.
    Receipts from Toxics and Pesticides Fees.--The 
Administration proposed a $50,000,000 reduction to the 
environmental programs and management account under the 
assumption that legislation would be enacted to increase fees 
on pesticide registrations and that $50,000,000 would be made 
available, as a result, to offset appropriations. The Committee 
notes that no legislative proposal has been received from the 
Administration and it is unlikely that these receipts will be 
available for fiscal year 2006 as explained below. Therefore, 
the Committee recommends an increase of $50,000,000 to ensure 
that critical programs in this area continue. The Committee 
believes that the budget should not assume the use of receipts 
that are dependent on the enactment of subsequent legislation 
unless such legislation is under active consideration by the 
Congress.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. The pesticide Safety Education Program should be funded 
at $1,200,000 in fiscal year 2006.
    2. EPA has adopted regulations to reduce emissions from on-
road heavy-duty diesel vehicles beginning in 2007 and from off-
road heavy-duty diesel vehicles beginning in 2010. These 
regulations will apply to new vehicles and not to the millions 
of existing vehicles, which will probably not be fully replaced 
until 2030. Through the clean diesel initiative, EPA is working 
to retrofit existing vehicles with new emission reduction 
technologies. These include the accelerated use of new fuels, 
after-treatment of diesel exhaust with retrofit technology, and 
replacing and rebuilding older engines with new cleaner engine 
technology. The Committee has provided $10,000,000 in support 
of these efforts.
    3. A total of $24,446,000 is included for the National 
Estuary Program, which includes $500,000 for each of the 28 NEP 
estuaries and $10,446,000 for other activities in support of 
the program.
    4. The Committee has included $40,000,000 for Programs of 
National and Regional Significance with the expectation that 
the EPA will conduct a competitive solicitation among special 
programs that have been added by the Congress to the 
Environmental Programs and Management account in at least 3 of 
the last 4 years. The Committee notes that many of these 
Congressional priorities provide invaluable assistance to the 
EPA and are performed at a cost substantially less than if EPA 
were to institute such programs in house. A competitive 
solicitation should ensure that the highest priority national 
and regional programs continue to be funded.
    5. The EPA needs to develop a clear plan for the Great 
Lakes Legacy Act implementation and explain in future budget 
requests how the requested funding for that program supports 
the plan.
    6. When Congress enacted the Pesticide Registration 
Improvement Act (PRIA) of 2003 to allow EPA to collect new 
pesticide registration fees, it specifically prohibited the 
collection of any new tolerance fees by the EPA. However, the 
Administration assumed the use of receipts from registration 
fees as part of its fiscal year 2005 and 2006 budget requests. 
EPA should not spend time proposing fees and promulgating rules 
in conflict with PRIA and should use its limited resources on 
other, more productive pesticide work.
    7. The Committee expects EPA to encourage local governments 
and communities to pursue innovative public-private 
partnerships, such as the Adopt-A-Waterway program, which, at 
no additional cost to the taxpayers, help to implement storm 
water pollution prevention activities, curb urban runoff, and 
improve water quality. Further, the Committee encourages EPA to 
work with the States to enter into public-private partnerships, 
such as Adopt-A-Waterway, to fulfill their public education and 
outreach responsibilities.
    8. The Committee is aware that the Pawnee Nation of 
Oklahoma has applied for treatment as a State status under the 
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the 
``Clean Water Act'') and that the issue is currently under 
litigation. The Committee will watch with interest the 
resolution of this issue.
    9. The Committee is aware of TCE contamination affecting a 
large number of homes in Endicott and Ithaca, NY, which is due 
to vapor intrusion of TCE contaminants into the basements of 
homes. The Committee is further aware that EPA is in the 
process of finalizing its TCE risk assessment and that his is a 
prcess that is likely to continue over the next two years or 
more. EPA has indicated that it is currently evaluating a 
number of interim approaches for screening levels for TCE while 
awaiting the final assessment. The Committee strongly urges EPA 
to work with the State of New York to adopt protective interim 
approaches, as soon as practicable, including consideration of 
provisional screening levels based upon the 2001 Human Health 
Risk Assessment. Finally, the Committee expects EPA to keep it 
informed periodically on progress on the development and 
implementation of interim procedures and actions at these sites 
and on completion of the new EPA risk assessment.

                      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. The IG also holds the position of Inspector 
General for the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation 
Board.




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $37,696,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        36,955,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        37,955,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +259,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        +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 $37,955,000 for the Office of 
Inspector General, an increase of $259,000 above the fiscal 
year 2005 level and $1,000,000 above the budget request. In 
addition, the Committee recommends that $13,536,000, as 
requested, be transferred to this account from the Hazardous 
Substance Superfund account. The Committee expects that 
$1,000,000 will be used to carry out the duties of Inspector 
General 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, 2005...........................       $41,688,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        40,218,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        40,218,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        -1,470,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $40,218,000, the budget request, 
for buildings and facilities, a decrease of $1,470,000 below 
the fiscal year 2005 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, 2005...........................    $1,247,477,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................     1,279,333,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................     1,258,333,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       +10,856,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       -21,000,000


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


    The Committee recommends $1,258,333,000 for hazardous 
substance superfund, an increase of $10,856,000 above the 
fiscal year 2005 level and $21,000,000 below the budget 
request. Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
    Enforcement.--The Committee recommends a decrease of 
$8,000,000 for enforcement, including decreases of $1,000,000 
for criminal enforcement and $7,000,000 for superfund 
enforcement.
    Homeland Security: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery.--
The Committee recommends a decrease of $11,500,000 for homeland 
security: preparedness, response, and recovery, including 
decreases of $2,000,000 for decontamination and $9,500,000 for 
laboratory preparedness and response.
    Operations and Administration.--The Committee recommends a 
decrease of $1,500,000 for facilities infrastructure and 
operations.
    Bill language.--Bill language is included, as requested, 
transferring $13,536,000 to the Office of Inspector General and 
$30,606,000 to the Science and Technology account.
    The Committee is aware of the Hudson River PCB Superfund 
Site and the burdens it has placed on the Town of Fort Edward, 
New York, which will host the dewatering facility for site 
remediation. The Committee is concerned that the Town of Fort 
Edward does not have the capacity to alleviate the multi-year 
impacts of this remediation without assistance. The Committee 
expects the EPA to provide assistance to the maximum extent 
possible, including financial and staffing assistance, to the 
Town of Fort Edward throughout the duration of this project and 
to maintain a close dialogue with the Town of Fort Edward and 
the Committee. The Committee also expects the EPA to provide 
semiannual reports on the Hudson River PCB Superfund project to 
the Committee.
    In 2001, the National Academy of Sciences issued ``A Risk-
Management Strategy for PCB-Contaminated Sediments'' that noted 
the lack of information on the effectiveness of remedial 
actions at contaminated sediment sites. The report called for 
more evaluations of remedial efforts to determine the 
effectiveness of such remedies, particularly dredging, in 
achieving projected environmental benefits. Currently, about 
140 contaminated sediment sites are in some stage of the 
Superfund process. A number of these sites are ``mega'' sites 
with large potential costs for both public and private parties. 
The Committee believes that independent experts should take 
another look at this issue with an emphasis on mega sites. 
Accordingly, the Committee expects the EPA to enter into an 
agreement with the National Academy of Sciences to examine 
whether: (1) actual costs match EPA estimates; (2) EPA 
estimated risk reduction benefits are being achieved as 
predicted; (3) such risk reduction benefits will be achieved 
significantly faster than other less costly remedial 
alternatives, including source control and natural recovery; 
(4) EPA is considering remedial alternatives on an equal 
footing, or dredging is the presumptive remedy; (5) EPA is 
considering potential adverse consequences of all remedial 
alternatives consistent with requirements of the National 
Environmental Policy Act; and (6) EPA regions are following 
agency sediment guidance and recommendations made by the 
Academy in its 2001 report. EPA should complete arrangements 
with the Academy for this study no later than December 1, 2005, 
and the study should be provided to the Committee no later than 
December 1, 2006.

                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. 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, 2005...........................       $69,440,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        73,027,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        73,027,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +3,587,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $73,027,000, the budget request, 
for the leaking underground storage tank program, an increase 
of $3,587,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level.

                           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, 2005...........................       $15,872,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        15,863,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        15,863,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................            -9,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $15,863,000, the budget request, 
for oil spill response, a decrease of $9,000 below the fiscal 
year 2005 level.

                   STATE AND TRIBAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS

                    (INCLUDING RESCISSIONS OF FUNDS)

    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, 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, 2005...........................    $3,575,349,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................     2,960,800,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................     3,127,800,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................      -447,549,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................      +167,000,000


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


    The Committee recommends $3,127,800,000 for State and 
tribal assistance grants, a decrease of $447,549,000 below the 
fiscal year 2005 level and $167,000,000 above the budget 
request. Changes to the budget request are detailed below.
    Brownfields.--The Committee recommends a decrease of 
$25,000,000 for Brownfields projects. The Committee recommended 
level represents an increase of more than $6,000,000 above the 
fiscal year 2005 level.
    Infrastructure Assistance: Clean Water State Revolving 
Fund.--The Committee recommends an increase of $120,000,000 for 
the clean water State revolving funds, including the use of 
$100,000,000 rescinded from expired contracts, grants, and 
interagency agreements from various EPA appropriation accounts.
    State and Tribal Infrastructure Grants/Congressional 
priorities.--The Committee recommends an increase of 
$200,000,000 for targeted STAG infrastructure grants. These 
specific grants will be designated in conference action on the 
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Act, 2006.
    Categorical Grants.--The Committee recommends a net 
decrease of $28,000,000 for categorical grants, including 
decreases of $8,000,000 for Brownfields, $8,000,000 for 
pollution control (section 106), $1,000,000 for pollution 
prevention, $23,000,000 for a new State and tribal performance 
fund, and $3,000,000 for wetlands program development and an 
increase of $15,000,000 for water quality cooperative 
agreements.
    Bill Language.--The Committee recommends bill language 
stipulating that funds associated with STAG special projects, 
from fiscal year 2000 or earlier, that have not received an 
approved grant by the end of fiscal year 2006 will be 
transferred to the appropriate State's Drinking Water or Clean 
Water State Revolving Fund. Bill language also provides for the 
transfer of funds, not needed for STAG projects, to the 
appropriate State's Drinking Water or Clean Water Revolving 
Fund (i.e., unused funds from completed projects or funds from 
projects that are determined to be ineligible for a grant) .
    The Committee also recommends the rescission of 
$100,000,000 in balances from expired contracts, grants, and 
interagency agreements from various EPA appropriation accounts 
and the use of these funds, as an additional amount of 
$100,000,000, for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund.
    The Committee also recommends bill language granting 
authority to EPA to make technical corrections on special 
project infrastructure grants subject to Committee 
consultation.
    The Committee has also included bill language, as requested 
by the Administration and as carried in previous appropriations 
acts, to: (1) extend for an additional year the authority for 
States to transfer funds between the Clean Water SRF and the 
Drinking Water SRF; (2) waive the one-third of 1 percent cap on 
the Tribal set aside from non-point source grants; (3) increase 
to 1.5 percent the cap on the Tribal set-aside for the Clean 
Water SRF; and (4) require that any funds provided to address 
the water infrastructure needs of colonias within the United 
States along the United States-Mexico border be spent only in 
areas where the local governmental entity has established an 
enforceable ordinance or rule which prevents additional 
development within colonias that lack water, wastewater, or 
other necessary infrastructure.
    Bill language has been included stipulating that, 
consistent with section 603 of the Federal Water Pollution 
Control Act, as amended, $50,000,000 of the $850,000,000 
proposed for the Clean Water SRF program is to be made 
available by the States for interest-free loans to increase 
non-point and non-structural, decentralized alternatives and 
expand the choices available to communities for clean water 
improvements. The Committee continues to support this program.
    While no specific special project grants are identified at 
this point for fiscal year 2006 as in past years, targeted 
grants shall be accompanied by a cost-share requirement whereby 
45 percent of a project's cost is the responsibility of the 
community or entity receiving the grant. In those few cases 
where such cost-share requirement poses a particular financial 
burden on the recipient community or entity, the Committee 
supports the Agency's use of its longstanding guidance for 
financial capability assessments to determine reductions or 
waivers from this match requirement. Except for the limited 
instances in which an applicant meets the criteria for a 
waiver, the Committee has provided no more than 55% of an 
individual project's cost, regardless of the amount 
appropriated.
    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. No STAG technical correction may be made without advance 
consultation with the Committee. The EPA should report to the 
Committee 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 and on 
funds transferred from projects to the drinking water and clean 
water SRFs.
    2. As in past years, from within the Committee's 
$50,000,000 recommendation for the United States-Mexico Border 
program, the Agency is expected to continue the Brownsville, 
Texas area water supply project, and the EI Paso, Texas area 
desalination and water supply project.
    3. With respect to financial assistance from State 
Revolving Funds, States should give priority to projects that 
use best management practices that provide cost savings and 
increased efficiency.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    The Committee has included bill language, requested by the 
Administration and supported by the Science Committee, 
permitting EPA to hire no more than 5 senior level scientists 
using expedited procedures. This authority is similar to that 
provided to the National Institutes of Health.
    The Committee has, again this year, included an 
administrative provision giving the Administrator specific 
authority, in the absence of an acceptable tribal program, to 
award cooperative agreements to Federally recognized Indian 
Tribes or Intertribal consortia so as to properly carry out 
EPA's environmental programs.

                      TITLE III--RELATED AGENCIES


                       DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


                             Forest Service

    The U.S. Forest Service manages 193 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 notes that the Forest Service celebrated its 
centennial year in 2005. The Forest Service was established on 
February 1, 1905 when the forest reserves were transferred from 
the General Land Office in the Department of the Interior to 
the newly named, U.S. Forest Service in the Department of 
Agriculture.

                     FOREST AND RANGELAND RESEARCH

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




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $276,384,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       285,400,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       285,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +8,616,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................          -400,000


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


    The Committee recommends $285,000,000 for forest and 
rangeland research, a decrease of $400,000 below the budget 
request and $8,616,000 above the fiscal year 2005 funding 
level. For clarity, the funding level for the forest inventory 
and analysis (FIA) program is displayed as a distinct activity. 
Funding for FIA under this heading is $62,100,000, $6,614,000 
below the requested level and $6,174,000 above the fiscal year 
2005 enacted level. The Committee notes that an additional 
$5,000,000 for the FIA program is provided within the State and 
private forestry appropriation. There is a total increase of 
$6,216,000 for the FIA program above the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level.
    The Committee recommendation includes all project funding 
as stipulated in the budget request and supporting documents, 
with the following exceptions. The advanced housing research 
consortium receives $1,500,000, which is $218,000 above the 
request. The adelgid research at the Northeastern station 
receives $1,600,000, an increase of $121,000 above the request. 
The emerald ash borer research project in Ohio receives 
$400,000, $153,000 above the request. The southern pine beetle 
initiative receives $2,400,000, $428,000 above the request. The 
Coweeta Hydrologic Lab receives $200,000 for research on 
reducing impacts of floods and landslides and $150,000 for 
technology transfer. Uncontrollable cost increases receive 
$6,177,000 above the request. The Montana State University and 
New Mexico State University Skeen range research projects and 
the salvage lumber research at the forest products lab are not 
funded. Funding for the National agroforestry research center 
is $727,000, as requested.
    The Committee expects to see detailed work plans, including 
costs and staffing, for the new Western Wildland Environmental 
Threat Assessment Center in Oregon and the Eastern Forest 
Environmental Threat Assessment Center in North Carolina, 
before funding from any appropriation for these new centers is 
distributed in fiscal year 2006. The Committee also directs the 
Forest Service to include explicit funding amounts for these 
two centers in future budget requests, regardless of the 
accounts involved. The Committee notes that these centers 
should, as provided in the Healthy Forest Restoration Act, 
focus primarily on hardwood forests and the threats from 
insects and disease which could destroy thousands of valuable 
acres of timberland and alter landscapes throughout surrounding 
areas. The centers should rely on emerging remote sensing 
technology and geospatial modeling.
    Bill Language.--The Committee recommends continuing bill 
language earmarking a specific allocation, $62,100,000, 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, 2005...........................      $341,606,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       253,387,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       254,875,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -86,731,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        +1,488,000


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


    The Committee recommends $254,875,000 for State and private 
forestry, $1,488,000 above the budget request and $86,731,000 
below the 2005 funding level. Aspects of the budget request are 
approved, unless otherwise stated below. Funding levels are 
presented as changes from the request. All funds requested for 
the healthy forests initiative are included.
    Forest Health Management.--The Committee recommends 
$103,000,000 for forest health management, $30,669,000 above 
the request and $1,135,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted 
level. The Committee emphasizes its concern with forest health 
and does not understand why, with the huge concern nationally 
for healthy forests, the budget request included such large 
decreases for these immensely valuable and vital forest health 
programs. 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 
programs such as: (1) the slow-the-spread gypsy moth program; 
(2) control and management of 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 $17,000,000 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 
$12,000,000 within the cooperative lands activity to assist 
State and private forest managers.
    Federal Lands Forest Health Management.--The Committee 
recommends $55,000,000 for Federal lands forest health 
management, $4,977,000 above the request and $764,000 above the 
fiscal year 2005 enacted level.
    Cooperative Lands Forest Health Management.--The Committee 
recommends $48,000,000 for cooperative lands forest health 
management, $25,692,000 above the budget request and $371,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The cooperative 
forest health activity includes $350,000 for the southern 
Appalachian office of the American Chestnut Foundation.
    The Committee encourages the Forest Service and other USDA 
agencies to work closely with Minnesota on the Dutch elm 
disease problem; this disease requires a dedicated and time-
critical effort to remove infected trees quickly and 
efficiently, to avoid an escalating bark beetle population.
    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 
$41,422,000 for cooperative fire protection, $14,586,000 above 
the request and $2,585,000 above the fiscal year 2005 funding 
level. The Committee also notes that the cooperative fire 
portion of the national fire plan within the wildland fire 
management account includes a total of $41,000,000 for State 
fire assistance and $8,000,000 for volunteer fire assistance.
    State Fire Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$35,422,000 for State fire assistance, $14,503,000 above the 
budget request and $2,502,000 above the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level. The increased funding includes $2,500,000 for 
use in the vicinity of the San Bernardino NF, CA, where a 
tremendous forest die-back has produced potentially 
catastrophic wildfire conditions. The Committee encourages the 
Forest Service to consider funding community wildfire 
protection planning projects for northern Arizona and in 
Colorado.
    Volunteer Fire Assistance.--The Committee recommends 
$6,000,000 for volunteer fire assistance, an increase of 
$83,000 above the request and the enacted level.
    Cooperative Forestry.--The Committee recommends 
$103,553,000 for cooperative forestry, $45,678,000 below the 
budget request and $41,841,000 below the 2005 enacted level.
    Forest Stewardship.--The Committee recommends $37,399,000 
for forest stewardship, $300,000 above the budget request and 
$5,079,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. Within the 
allocation for forest stewardship, the Committee provides 
funding of $500,000 for watershed activities in the New York 
City watershed, an increase of $100,000 over the budget 
request. The remaining increase above the request is $200,000 
for the Northeastern area to work with Forest Service research 
and university forest scientists to improve land use decision 
models and forest simulators which can be used by private 
landowners, public land managers, and educators.
    The Committee encourages efforts to better target the 
delivery of the forest stewardship program to focus on priority 
resource concerns. This will allow close monitoring and 
quantification of on-the-ground accomplishments, more clearly 
demonstrating program outcomes.
    Forest Legacy Program.--The committee recommends 
$25,000,000 for the forest legacy program, a decrease of 
$55,000,000 below the budget request and $32,134,000 below the 
fiscal year 2005 enacted level. This allocation includes 
$5,000,000 for program administration and $20,000,000 for high 
priority projects.
    Urban and Community Forestry.--The Committee recommends 
$28,175,000 for urban and community forestry, an increase of 
$700,000 above the budget request and $3,775,000 below the 
fiscal year 2005 level. This increase above the request is for 
continued support of the long-standing and successful 
northeastern Pennsylvania community forestry program.
    The Committee has yet to see the final, new allocation 
methodology and performance based granting which was directed 
previously for urban and community forestry. The Committee will 
reconsider funding for this program depending on the results of 
that process.
    Economic Action Programs.--The Committee recommends 
$7,979,000 for economic action programs, a decrease of 
$11,053,000 below the fiscal year 2005 level. This program was 
not included in the budget request. The Committee has 
transferred $5,000,000 here for biomass grants which was 
requested as part of the hazardous fuels program. The biomass 
program has promise, but it is more appropriately funded within 
State and private forestry. Within the economic action program 
the Committee also recommends: (1) $1,000,000 for the Education 
and Research Consortium (ERC) of Western NC environmental 
education effort; (2) $329,000 for the New England value added 
wood products project, MA; (3) $250,000 for the Allegheny area, 
PA tourism effort; (4) $400,000 for watershed work in the New 
York City watershed; and (5) $1,000,000 for economic 
development grants to Custer County, ID, consistent with the 
Central Idaho Economic Development and Recreation Act, which 
shall be distributed upon authorization of that Act. The funds 
for the ERC are for the on-going educational programs provided 
by the ERC, including the Pisgah Forest Institute, and for the 
existing efforts in Pennsylvania and northern California.
    Forest Resource Information and Analysis.--The Committee 
recommends $5,000,000 for forest resource information and 
analysis, $343,000 above the budget request and $42,000 above 
the 2005 enacted level.
    International Program.--The Committee recommends $6,900,000 
for the international program, $1,911,000 above the request and 
$490,000 above the fiscal year 2005 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 our 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. The Committee has not included the 
Administration's request to also derive funding for the forest 
stewardship program and the urban and community forestry 
program from the LWCF.

                         NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM

    Within the National Forest System (NFS), which covers 193 
million acres, there are 51 Congressionally designated areas, 
including 20 National recreation areas, and 7 National scenic 
areas. The NFS includes a substantial amount of the Nation's 
softwood inventory. In fiscal year 2002, over 208,000 acres of 
national forest vegetation was managed through timber sale 
activities, which produced 1.8 billion board feet of timber 
products. The NFS hosted over 211 million visits in fiscal year 
2002. The NFS includes over 133,000 miles of trails and 25,000 
developed facilities, including 4,389 campgrounds, 58 major 
visitor centers, and about one-half of the Nation's ski-lift 
capacity. Wilderness areas cover 35 million acres, nearly two-
thirds of the wilderness in the contiguous 48 States. The 
Forest Service also has major habitat management 
responsibilities for more than 3,000 species of wildlife and 
fish, and 10,000 plant species and provides important habitat 
and open space for over 422 threatened or endangered species. 
Half of the Nation's big game habitat and coldwater fish 
habitat, including salmon and steelhead, is located on National 
forest system lands and waters. In addition, in the 16 western 
States, where the water supply is sometimes critically short, 
about 55 percent of the total annual yield of water is from 
National forest system lands.




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................    $1,392,959,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................     1,651,357,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................     1,423,920,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       +30,961,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................      -227,437,000


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


    The Committee recommends $1,423,920,000 for the National 
forest system, a decrease of $227,437,000 below the request and 
$30,961,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The 
Committee has not agreed to include hazardous fuels funding 
within this account; this is discussed under the wildland fire 
management heading. The overall NFS funding is $53,563,000 
above the request, if the transfer of $281,000,000 for the 
hazardous fuels program is not counted. All funds requested for 
the healthy forests initiative are included.
    Land Management Planning.--The Committee recommends 
$59,057,000 for land management planning as requested, a 
decrease of $4,110,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted 
level. The Committee expects that, as the new planning 
regulations are implemented, there should be cost savings.
    Inventory and Monitoring.--The Committee recommends 
$169,009,000 for inventory and monitoring, $2,000,000 above the 
budget request and $1,707,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level. 
The increase above the request is to partially offset fixed 
costs.
    Recreation, Heritage and Wilderness.--The Committee 
recommends $265,200,000 for recreation, heritage and 
wilderness, $7,856,000 above the budget request and $7,857,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 level. Within the increase, the 
Committee has included $100,000 for the Ocoee and Hiwasse 
corridor management plan and $150,000 for a strategic trails 
analysis on the Cherokee NF, TN. The remainder of the increase 
is to partially offset fixed costs.
    The Committee encourages Forest Service units to conduct 
thorough, public analyses of recreation services, but the 
Service should maintain its tradition of providing pristine 
backcountry and dispersed recreation, as well as developed 
recreation. Recreation sites should not be closed or access 
denied without full public involvement.
    The Committee also encourages the Forest Service to 
maintain adequate public and scientific services at the Mt. St. 
Helens National Volcanic monument.
    Wildlife and Fish Habitat Management.--The Committee 
recommends $134,800,000 for wildlife and fish habitat 
management, an increase of $9,849,000 above the budget request 
and $51,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level. The increase 
above the request is to maintain existing programs. The 
Committee notes the importance of Forest Service habitat 
management for the Nation's fish and wildlife, and to many 
partners. Many habitat projects fulfill common watershed 
improvement and hazardous fuels reduction goals.
    Grazing Management.--The Committee recommends $49,000,000 
for grazing management, $4,341,000 above the budget request and 
$966,000 above the fiscal year 2005 funding level. The increase 
above the request is to maintain existing programs.
    Forest Products.--The Committee recommends $283,297,000 for 
forest products, $5,000,000 above the budget request and 
$10,050,000 above the fiscal year 2005 funding level. The 
increase above the request includes a $500,000 increase for the 
base program on the National Forests in North Carolina. The 
remainder of the increase should be used to maintain existing 
programs.
    Vegetation and Watershed Management.--The Committee 
recommends $183,700,000 for vegetation and watershed 
management, a decrease of $10,074,000 below the request and a 
decrease of $5,914,000 below the fiscal year 2005 funding 
level. The Committee has agreed to the request to move funding 
for environmental compliance and protection projects to the 
minerals and geology management program. This reduces the 
vegetation and watershed management account $24,241,000 below 
the enacted level. Therefore, not counting the environmental 
compliance program, the recommended funding level for 
vegetation and watershed management is $18,327,000 above the 
enacted level.
    The budget request includes an increase above the enacted 
level of $21,807,000 for improving and establishing forest 
vegetation; instead the Committee recommendation agrees to 
increase these activities by $11,733,000 above the enacted 
level, a reduction of $10,074,000 from the request. The other 
subactivities are funded at the requested levels.
    The Committee notes the recent GAO report which indicates 
that the Forest Service has inadequate data to accurately 
quantify its reforestation needs. The Committee has provided a 
substantial funding increase for these activities in fiscal 
year 2006, but the Service needs to standardize guidance for 
reporting data on reforestation and timber stand improvement 
needs and improve the data's accuracy before additional 
increases can be considered. In addition, the Committee expects 
the Forest Service to provide clear presentations of 
reforestation needs and accomplishments in future budget 
justifications, including the specific use and distribution of 
the mandatory funding from the Reforestation Fund, as well as 
partner efforts, such as the new American Forests initiative.
    Minerals and Geology Management.--The Committee recommends 
$85,865,000 for minerals and geology management, an increase of 
$12,074,000 above the request and $30,118,000 above the 2005 
funding level. Most of this large increase above the enacted 
level is due to the transfer of the environmental compliance 
and restoration subactivites out of the vegetation and 
watershed activity. The Committee recommendation includes the 
requested $25,426,000 for these subactivities which were not 
funded in minerals and geology in fiscal year 2005.
    The budget request includes large reductions which are ill-
advised for the administration of mineral operations and for 
the geological services programs. The Committee recommendation 
fully funds the requested budget for minerals and geology 
management, plus increases to the request of $7,876,000 for the 
administration of mineral operations, $1,000,000 for processing 
mineral applications, and $3,198,000 for the management of 
geologic resources and hazards. This results in $1,000,000 
increases above the enacted for each of these three 
subactivites.
    Land Ownership Management.--The Committee recommends 
$93,000,000 for land ownership management, $8,843,000 above the 
budget request and $871,000 above the 2005 funding level. The 
increase above the request is to maintain existing programs. 
The Committee expects the Forest Service to maintain the full-
time lands team to work on the Pacific Crest Trail project and 
other similar projects.
    Law Enforcement Operations.--The Committee recommends 
$91,000,000 for law enforcement operations, $4,674,000 above 
the budget request and $4,986,000 above the 2005 funding level. 
The increases above the request include a total of $1,000,000 
for anti-drug activities on the Daniel Boone NF, KY, and 
$700,000 for work on the Mark Twain NF, MO. The remainder of 
the increase above the request is for general program delivery.
    The Committee agrees with the concept displayed in special 
exhibit 15 of the budget justification regarding making all 
programs and activities, other than emergency appropriations, 
contribute to indirect cost pools. Bill language is included 
under Forest Service administrative provisions to accomplish a 
transfer for law enforcement on a one-time basis. The Forest 
Service should continue this equitable treatment of programs 
for cost pools in subsequent years.
    Centennial of Service Challenge.--The Committee notes that 
this challenge cost share effort begun in fiscal year 2005 
appears to be very successful. More than 230 individual partner 
projects have been funded in all regions of the Nation. These 
efforts will bring in more than $20,000,000 in partner 
contributions which will enhance the national forest system and 
improve public services. Therefore, the Committee has provided 
$9,000,000 to continue this program, which was not included in 
the request, a reduction of $861,000 from the fiscal year 2005 
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. The Forest Service 
should continue to display data on these efforts in subsequent 
budget justifications.
    Other.--The Committee has provided $992,000, as requested, 
for management of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, NM, a 
reduction of $2,607,000 from the fiscal year 2005 enacted 
level. The Committee notes that, if there are specific 
infrastructure needs, such funding should be requested under 
the capital improvement and maintenance appropriation and 
compete with other Forest Service projects.
    The Committee recommendation includes the full funding 
requested by the Administration for the Quincy Library Group 
project in California and for the Land Between the Lakes 
National Recreation Area, KY and TN.

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

                     (INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................    $2,098,487,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................     1,444,267,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................     1,790,506,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................      -307,981,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................      +346,239,000


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


    The Committee recommends $1,790,506,000 for wildland fire 
management. This is $346,239,000 above the budget request and 
$307,981,000 below the enacted level, which also included 
certain emergency appropriations as well as $394,443,000 for 
additional, urgent wildfire suppression funds. The hazardous 
fuels funding is retained under this heading as has been past 
practice, as discussed below. Hazardous fuels funding was 
requested in the National forest system account. Increases 
above the request for other wildfire management activities 
total $61,239,000. The overall Committee recommendation for 
wildland fire management is $117,490,000 above the 2005 funding 
level, not counting the urgent wildfire suppression funds and 
the emergency funds.
    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, fire plan research and 
development, and restoration and rehabilitation.
    Wildfire Preparedness.--The Committee recommends 
$691,014,000 for wildfire preparedness, an increase of 
$15,000,000 above the budget request and $14,544,000 above the 
enacted level. The funding requested within preparedness for 
the joint fire science program, $8,000,000, is included under 
other wildfire operations as has been the past practice and 
agreement. The Committee sees no compelling reason to include 
any other funding activities in the preparedness and 
suppression budget lines, and the Committee directs the 
Administration not to request funding for joint fire science 
under preparedness. After transfer of joint fire science, the 
overall preparedness funding level is $23,000,000 above the 
request, which helps offset fixed cost increases. The Committee 
understands that it is imperative to maintain firefighting 
readiness so that initial attack has a greater chance of 
putting fires out while they are small, less destructive, and 
less expensive to suppress.
    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 2003 and 2004. 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 2004 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.
    Wildfire Suppression Operations.--The Committee recommends 
$700,492,000 for wildfire suppression operations as requested, 
an increase of $51,633,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted 
funding level. This funding level is $45,560,000 above the 10-
year average of actual wildfire suppression expenditures.
    The Committee remains concerned about the high costs of 
large fire incidents. The Forest Service, along with the 
Department of the Interior, should ensure that cost containment 
is an important priority when suppressing wildland fires. 
Therefore, the Committee directs the Forest Service and the 
Department of the Interior to continue reports directed 
previously and to continue 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 the second and fifth bulleted 
proposals in the appendix to the budget of the U.S. government 
under the fire operations heading. 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 hold back funding which may be urgently needed for 
suppression activities elsewhere in the Nation as instructed in 
the budget appendix.
    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 administration. All programs in the agency 
should pay the full cost of operations, including overhead. 
Accordingly, the Committee directs the Forest Service to charge 
appropriate cost pool expenses to wildfire suppression in a 
manner commensurate with the method for assessing other funds 
and to continue this procedure hereafter. The Committee has 
provided similar instructions for the law enforcement program. 
This concept was displayed in special exhibit 15 of the budget 
justification.
    Hazardous Fuels.--The Committee has provided $286,000,000 
for hazardous fuels reduction work, $5,000,000 above the budget 
request (which was in the NFS account) and an increase of 
$23,461,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level. The budget 
request also included $5,000,000 for biomass grants out of the 
hazardous fuels funding. The Committee has transferred that 
funding and program to the economic action program in the State 
and private forestry account, where it is more appropriately 
operated. Thus, the overall hazardous fuels program funding is 
actually $10,000,000 over the requested level. The 
recommendation includes no less than $5,000,000 above the 
requested funding level to treat the urgent and dangerous 
situation on the San Bernardino NF, CA, caused by drought and a 
catastrophic bark beetle outbreak.
    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 has included new bill language which allows 
the Chief of the Forest Service to transfer hazardous fuels 
funding into the national forest system account if, at the 
Chief's sole discretion, it will be advantageous to the 
government. If a decision is made to make this transfer, the 
Forest Service shall notify the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations 30 days in advance of the transfer. 
Additionally, 90 days after the end of the fiscal year, the 
Forest Service shall submit a report to the Committees which 
details and explains the benefits of this transfer, including 
steps taken to ensure close coordination of projects with the 
Department of the Interior and the States, as well as steps 
taken to help implement completed community wildfire protection 
plans. Included in this report, the Forest Service, in 
conjunction with the Department of the Interior, should detail 
the methods used to prioritize fuels projects. A common project 
prioritization method should be used by both departments to 
assure the American public that all funds, regardless of 
funding source, are used for the highest priority fuels 
reduction projects.
    Rehabilitation.--The Committee has restored $9,281,000 for 
the burned area rehabilitation and restoration program, 
$7,281,000 above the budget request and $3,538,000 below the 
fiscal year 2005 enacted level. As presented 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 2005 
level. The increase above the request is for general program 
delivery.
    Fire Plan Research and Development.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $21,719,000 for research and 
development, $4,834,000 above the budget request and equal to 
the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The increase above the 
request is to support important research efforts nationwide. 
Considering the multi-billion dollar efforts supported for 
Federal and State wildfire management and hazardous fuels 
treatments, it is imperative that research and development be 
retained to guide future applications and develop technologies 
which may help reduce costs, save lives, and protect natural 
resources.
    Joint Fire Sciences Program.--The Committee has provided 
$8,000,000 for the joint fire science program, an increase of 
$111,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. The budget 
request included funding for this important program in the 
preparedness activity, as discussed above. This program is 
producing important scientific and technical information, often 
in collaboration with the Nation's forestry schools, that is 
needed to support the large effort concerning hazardous fuels 
and other fire management issues.
    Forest Health Management, Federal Lands and Co-op Lands.--
The Committee has provided $25,000,000 for the forest health 
portion of the national fire plan, including $15,000,000 for 
Federal lands and $10,000,000 for cooperative efforts with the 
States and others. This funding level is $13,428,000 above the 
request and $347,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. 
The increase above the request is for general program delivery. 
This funding should be used in conjunction with the similar 
funding in State and private forestry to continue the more 
integrated approach to forest health, including prevention, and 
restoration and rehabilitation of forests and rangelands. The 
Committee expects the Forest Service to focus on major 
problems, such as southern pine beetles, western mountain bark 
beetles, adelgids, and other pests and pathogens, as well as 
invasive plants, which harm forests and subsequently increase 
wildfire hazards.
    The Committee is concerned that the Administration does not 
recognize forest health management as a vital component of the 
healthy forests initiative and another tool in 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 and Volunteer Fire Assistance.--The Committee has 
provided $41,000,000 for State fire assistance, $11,585,000 
above the request and $821,000 above the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level. The Committee does not understand why the 
Administration chose to dramatically cut this successful 
cooperative conservation and protection program in its request. 
The program is essential to maintain and enhance the 
partnership between State foresters and State fire agencies and 
the Federal wildfire management enterprise. The increase above 
the request is for general program delivery and $500,000 is for 
implementation of community wildfire protection plans in the 
North Lake Tahoe area. The Committee expects the Forest Service 
to support and expand the Fire Safe Councils in California and 
that the Forest Service will use this innovative program as a 
model for other States. State fire assistance funds should also 
be used preferentially to support community wildfire protection 
planning and implementation.
    The Committee has also included $8,000,000 for volunteer 
fire assistance, an increase of $111,000 above the request and 
the enacted level. This brings the volunteer fire funding to a 
total of $14,000,000 including funding in State and private 
forestry.

                  CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE





Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $565,516,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       380,792,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       468,260,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -97,256,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +87,468,000


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


    The Committee recommends $468,260,000 for capital 
improvement and maintenance, $87,468,000 above the request and 
$97,256,000 below the fiscal year 2005 enacted level. In order 
to more clearly display and track Forest Service maintenance 
funding, it has been separated out as separate budget 
activities this year within the former facilities, roads, and 
trails activities.
    The Committee notes that the Forest Service has a huge 
backlog in deferred maintenance and failed roads and buildings 
all over the Nation. However, the budget request this year has 
huge reductions in maintenance and construction which are 
unacceptable. Portions of these reductions were to be made up 
with new legislative procedures.
    The Committee notes that no legislative proposal has been 
received from the Administration and it is unlikely that 
substantial, additional receipts will be available for fiscal 
year 2006. Therefore, the Committee recommends an increase of 
$47,647,000 to ensure that critical facility, road and trail 
maintenance funding is maintained close to the fiscal year 2005 
levels. The Committee believes that the budget should not 
assume the use of receipts that are dependent on the enactment 
of subsequent legislation unless such legislation is under 
active consideration by the Congress.
    The Administration's concept is to: (1) charge all accounts 
an across-the-board assessment for facility maintenance, 
further adding to the indirect cost pools which have hampered 
delivery of funds to on-the-ground programs; and (2) increase 
the authority to sell unneeded facilities, without creating 
inholdings, to generate funds to use for basic maintenance. 
This Committee notes that it previously started a program to 
sell unneeded facilities, and this has been a successful pilot 
to date. However, it has yet to generate substantial sums, and 
in any case, increased sales authority would not provide 
immediately needed funds for routine facility maintenance. In 
some portions of the Nation the Forest Service has excess 
facilities, and the Service should use all deliberate speed to 
dispose of these facilities to the benefit of the government. 
Title IV includes language extending the facility sale 
authority.
    The Committee has used its scarce resources to bring 
maintenance funding back close to the enacted levels, while 
accepting a 37% decrease from the fiscal year 2005 enacted 
level for facilities construction.
    The Committee expects to continue to receive regular 
updates, and a continued display in the budget justification, 
on progress in addressing the huge backlog of deferred 
maintenance and repair, especially as it relates to the 
activities funded through the road and trails fund, the pilot 
conveyance authority and the infrastructure improvement funds.
    Facilities.--The Committee recommends $153,761,000 for 
facilities maintenance and capital improvement, $36,045,000 
above the budget request and $45,008,000 below the fiscal year 
2005 level. The Committee recommendation for facility 
maintenance is $343,000 above the enacted and $26,478,000 above 
the request. The Committee has funded the capital improvement 
request with the following changes:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Change from
              State                     Project             request:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CA..............................  San Bernardino NF           $2,000,000
                                   HQ.
CA..............................  Redwood Sci. lab             2,000,000
                                   seismic retrofit.
CA..............................  Meeks Bay                      778,000
                                   campground.
CA..............................  Turtle Rock Fire             1,200,000
                                   Station relocation.
CO..............................  Cayton campground..            454,000
FL..............................  Clearwater/Lake                800,000
                                   Dorr.
ID..............................  Driggs warehouse               800,000
                                   replacement.
NC..............................  Cheoah Ranger                  900,000
                                   Station.
NC..............................  Santeetlah Lake              1,500,000
                                   Area development.
OR/WA...........................  Region 6 facility            1,000,000
                                   disposal.
PA..............................  Allegheny NF                 2,600,000
                                   recreation &
                                   admin. sites.
TN..............................  Cherokee NF                  2,500,000
                                   recreation and
                                   admin. sites.
WI..............................  Forest Products Lab         -8,000,000
                                   modernization.
WY/CO...........................  Medicine Bow-Routt           1,035,000
                                   storage
                                   consolidation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee notes that it has reduced the funding for the 
construction of new buildings for important wood products 
research at the Forest Products Lab (FPL), WI. The Committee 
recommendation includes $2,000,000 to conduct detailed plans 
for this effort. As currently proposed, this project will cost 
over $40,000,000 and require construction of several new 
scientific buildings. The Committee supports wood products 
research, and greatly admires the outstanding record 
established by the FPL, but it has determined that the Forest 
Service needs to do additional comprehensive planning and 
partnering before undertaking such a large effort. Therefore, 
the Committee encourages the Forest Service, along with its 
partners and research users, to establish an integrated plan 
for agency-wide wood products utilization research, including 
the modernization of the Forest Products lab, and include 
strategic plans, with staffing cost estimates and a commitment 
from Administration leadership to pursue adequate staffing for 
any new facilities which may be needed.
    Roads.--The Committee recommends $225,499,000 for road 
maintenance and capital improvement, an increase of $35,940,000 
above the budget request and $897,000 below the fiscal year 
2005 level. The Committee has maintained the road 
decommissioning authority at $15,000,000. The Committee notes 
that at even these funding levels, the existence of failed 
roads continues to increase. The inventory of roads which can 
be used by passenger cars declines every year, and absent some 
new infusion of funds, such as from the highway trust fund, 
continued deterioration is assured.
    Trails.--The Committee recommends $76,000,000 for trails 
maintenance and capital improvement, $12,208,000 above the 
budget request and $293,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level. 
The Committee directs continuation of the increased funding 
amounts provided in fiscal year 2005 for maintenance of the 
national scenic and historic trails. In addition, within the 
increase above the request for trails construction, the 
Committee has included: $500,000 for construction at the 
Florida National Scenic Trail; $1,000,000 for construction at 
the Continental Divide trail; $1,000,000 for construction at 
the Pacific Crest National Scenic trail; $250,000 for the Rio 
Sabana trail, PR; and $750,000 for trail construction at the 
Midewin National Tallgrass Prairie, IL. The remainder of the 
increase above the request is for general program delivery. In 
addition, the Forest Service should maintain a full time 
Pacific Crest Trail (PCT) manager; provide funds to work with 
the Pacific Crest Trail Association; and aid PCT trail 
relocation reviews. The Forest Service should make every effort 
to work with volunteer groups, which contribute work, time, and 
money to enhance Federal resources.
    Infrastructure Improvement.--The Committee recommends 
$13,000,000 for infrastructure improvement, $3,275,000 above 
the budget request and $829,000 below the fiscal year 2005 
enacted level. The Committee has included $2,000,000 for the 
region 6 fish passage program.

                            LAND ACQUISITION




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $61,007,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        40,000,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        15,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -46,007,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       -25,000,000


    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for land acquisition, 
a decrease of $25,000,000 below the budget request and 
$46,007,000 below the enacted level. This amount includes 
$13,000,000 for acquisition management, $500,000 for cash 
equalization, and $1,500,000 for inholdings.

         ACQUISITION OF LANDS FOR NATIONAL FORESTS SPECIAL ACTS




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $1,054,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         1,069,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         1,069,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................           +15,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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

            ACQUISITION OF LANDS TO COMPLETE LAND EXCHANGES




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................          $231,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................           234,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................           234,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................            +3,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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

                         RANGE BETTERMENT FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $3,021,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         2,963,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         2,963,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................           -58,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation 
estimated to be $2,963,000, 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, 2005...........................           $64,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................            64,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................            64,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $64,000, 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, 2005...........................        $5,879,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         5,467,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         5,467,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          -412,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $5,467,000, the same as the budget 
request and $412,000 below the enacted level, for the 
management of national forest lands for subsistence uses in 
Alaska.

               ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS, FOREST SERVICE

    The Committee has continued administrative provisions 
contained in previous years. The Committee has also continued 
the wildland fire transfer authority, which allows use of funds 
from other accounts available to the Forest Service during 
wildfire emergencies when other wildfire emergency funds are 
not available. As was the case last year, the first transfer of 
funds into the wildland fire management account shall include 
unobligated funds from the land acquisition and the forest 
legacy accounts.
    The Committee limits funding for the working capital fund 
of the Department of Agriculture to the $72,646,000 requested 
in the budget. As discussed under the law enforcement program 
heading, the Committee has included bill language allowing a 
transfer of funds consistent with the budget request special 
exhibit 15.
    The Committee continues the authority for transfers to the 
National Forest Foundation and the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation. The Committee notes that it is acceptable for these 
foundations to make grants to Federal recipients, including 
Forest Service offices. The Committee allows $250,000 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 about how the Forest 
Service has implemented the ``Competitive Sourcing'' 
initiative. This effort was mismanaged in the past. 
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, a 25% increase 
over the fiscal year 2005 limitation.
    The Committee is concerned that the Forest Service has an 
inadequate ability to obtain and produce reliable performance 
data that the Congress and the public can utilize to assess 
management effectiveness. The Committee notes the recent USDA-
OIG audit (March 2005) that assessed the agency's long-term 
challenges regarding the results act, and presented findings on 
the lack of adequate performance data. The Committee directs 
the Forest Service to develop and implement a system of 
internal controls to ensure improved agency performance data in 
fiscal year 2006 and to include a presentation on this 
improvement as part of the next budget justification. As part 
of this effort, the Chief should implement policies that hold 
agency line officers accountable for reporting more accurate 
performance data in 2006 and establishing an independent review 
process to validate the reported information. Measurable 
indicators should be maintained for line officer progress on 
programs and accomplishments. This information should be 
readily available to Congress and the public.
    The Committee recognizes that the Forest Service is engaged 
in two large efforts to improve administrative functions 
through detailed and expensive business process reengineering 
of financial services and human resources. The Committee 
supports efforts to improve in these areas, but it is concerned 
that the efforts may not be adequately documented and open to 
public scrutiny. Therefore, the Committee directs the Forest 
Service to provide quarterly reports on business process 
reengineering efforts and 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 recently completed a detailed review of the 
use of reserve fund accounts by the land managing agencies. The 
Committee found that the Forest Service has generally had 
acceptable use of this fund. The Committee directs the Forest 
Service to notify the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations before making allocations in excess of $500,000 
from this account. The Committee also requests that future 
budget justification displays on this fund include a complete 
presentation of spending from the fund during the most recent 
complete fiscal year, with a brief explanation why the uses 
were indeed important, unanticipated, and appropriate.

                DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


                         Indian Health Service


                         INDIAN HEALTH SERVICES

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




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................    $2,596,492,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................     2,732,298,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................     2,732,298,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................      +135,806,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $2,732,298,000 for Indian health 
services, the same as the budget request and $135,806,000 above 
the fiscal year 2005 level.
    The Committee has retained the requested operational 
increases in the health services programs, including the 
increases to mental health and substance abuse programs. The 
Committee suggests that the IHS direct some of the increased 
funding to combating youth violence and illicit drug problems 
in Indian country. The Committee urges the Administration to 
continue to request increases in these areas in future budget 
requests. The Committee reiterates that all program funding 
under this appropriation is to be treated as recurring programs 
in future years unless expressly stated to the contrary.
    Bill Language.--Language is included under Indian Health 
Services to ensure that all American Indian and Alaska Native 
children with disabilities have access to the services afforded 
to them through the Individuals with Disabilities Education 
Act. The Act provides for the creation of a comprehensive 
system of coordinated services to ensure adequate health and 
human services for all American Indian and Alaska Native 
children with disabilities enrolled in Bureau-funded schools 
and this provision provides the mechanism for identifying these 
children to ensure that all eligible children have access to 
such services.

                        INDIAN HEALTH FACILITIES




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $388,574,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       315,668,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       370,774,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -17,800,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................       +55,106,000


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


    The Committee recommends $370,774,000 for Indian health 
facilities, $17,800,000 below the fiscal year 2005 level and 
$55,106,000 above the budget request. Changes to the request 
include increases of $5,000,000 for maintenance and 
improvements, $46,806,000 for health care facilities 
construction and $3,300,000 for medical equipment.
    The Committee agrees to the following distribution of 
health care facilities construction funds:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Committee
                 Project                   2006 request   recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kayenta, AZ Health Center...............               0      $3,878,000
San Carlos, AZ Health Center............               0       6,139,000
Fort Belknap, MT quarters...............       3,326,000       3,326,000
Southern California Regional Treatment                 0      11,242,000
 Center.................................
Northern California Regional Treatment                 0      11,547,000
 Center.................................
Small Ambulatory Facilities.............               0      10,000,000
Dental Facilities Program...............               0       4,000,000
                                         -------------------------------
    Total...............................       3,326,000      50,132,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee agrees to the following:
    1. 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.
    2. The increase for equipment should be focused on 
replacing outdated medical equipment and should remain in the 
base budget. The Committee urges the Service and the Office of 
Management and Budget to request increases in this activity. 
Existing medical equipment in Indian country is rapidly 
becoming outdated and needs are increasing as more hospitals 
and clinics are built and expanded.
    3. 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.
    4. Sanitation funds should not be used to provide 
sanitation facilities for new homes funded by the housing 
programs of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 
The HUD should provide any needed funds to the IHS for that 
purpose.
    5. 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 to conduct certain 
research and worker training activities associated with the 
Nation's Hazardous Substance Superfund program.




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $79,842,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        80,289,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        80,289,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +447,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $80,289,000, the budget request, 
for the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, an 
increase of $447,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level.

            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, 2005...........................       $76,041,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        76,024,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        76,024,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................           -17,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $76,024,000, the budget request, 
for toxic substances and environmental public health, a 
decrease of $17,000 below the fiscal year 2005 level.
    The Committee expects the Agency to provide periodic 
updates on its study of the health effects of naturally 
occurring asbestos, which is due to the Committee by September 
30, 2006.

                         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 leads interagency decision-making of all 
environmental matters.




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $3,258,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         2,717,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         2,717,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          -541,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $2,717,000 for the Council on 
Environmental Quality and Office of Environmental Quality, the 
same as the budget request and $541,000 below the enacted 
level. The Committee commends this office for achieving 
administrative savings.

             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, 2005...........................        $9,424,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         9,200,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         9,200,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          -224,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $9,200,000, the budget request, 
for salaries and expenses of the Chemical Safety and Hazard 
Investigation Board, a decrease of $224,000 below the fiscal 
year 2005 level.

              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, 2005...........................        $4,930,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         8,601,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         8,601,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +3,671,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $8,601,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation, 
the same as the budget request and $3,671,000 above the fiscal 
year 2005 enacted level.

    Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts 
                              Development


                        PAYMENT TO THE INSTITUTE




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $5,916,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         6,300,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         6,300,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +384,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $6,300,000 for the Institute of 
American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development, 
the same as the budget request and $384,000 above the fiscal 
year 2005 enacted level.

                        Smithsonian Institution

    The Smithsonian Institution is the world's largest museum 
and research complex, with 17 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 2004, the 
Smithsonian attracted more than 20,000,000 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, 2005...........................      $489,035,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       524,135,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       524,381,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       +35,346,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................          +246,000


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


    The Committee recommends $524,381,000 for salaries and 
expenses, an increase of $246,000 above the budget request and 
an increase of $35,346,000 above the enacted level. The 
recommendation includes $300,000 to continue the Tropical 
Research Institute's work in microorganisms in tropical soil. 
The Committee notes that the new National Museum of African 
American History and Culture is just now beginning to hire 
staff and begin its planning effort, therefore its funding is 
maintained at the enacted level.
    The Committee supports the Smithsonian's effort to focus 
Federal funding on basic maintenance and facilities operations, 
hence the recommendation includes the requested increases, 
above the enacted levels, of $6,309,000 for facilities 
maintenance and $12,268,000 for facilities operations, security 
and support. In addition, the Committee recommendation 
redirects into the facilities maintenance account $500,000 of 
the funding increase requested for institution-wide programs 
and $400,000 from the administration account. This still leaves 
the administration account with a 2.5% increase above the 
enacted level. The facilities maintenance account includes 
other redirected funds and a small program increase, giving it 
a total funding level of $47,680,000; this is $2,000,000 above 
the request and $8,309,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted 
level, representing a 21% increase over the enacted.

                           FACILITIES CAPITAL




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $126,123,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        90,900,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        90,900,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................       -35,223,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $90,900,000 for facilities 
capital, as requested, a reduction of $35,223,000 below the 
enacted level. The Committee recommendation redirects 
$1,000,000 of the requested increase for facilities planning 
and design into the revitalization account for use on the Asia 
II exhibit at the National Zoological Park. In addition, the 
Committee directs the Smithsonian to redirect $8,000,000 of the 
requested funding for the wetland exhibit into the Asia II 
exhibit project. It is important that the Asia II exhibit not 
be delayed; it is a vital part of the park and continued 
exhibition of elephants in a family group can not be maintained 
without the new project. The Committee also expects that the 
comprehensive planning effort currently underway at the 
zoological park is the appropriate tool to determine the best 
future concept and scope for any rebuilding of a wetlands 
exhibit.

           ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS, SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

    The Committee recommendation continues previous bill 
language included under Administrative Provisions which 
prohibits the Smithsonian from using funds to purchase any 
additional buildings without prior consultation with the House 
and Senate Committees on Appropriations.

                        National Gallery of Art

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

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $91,708,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        97,100,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        97,100,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +5,392,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $97,100,000, the budget request, 
for salaries and expenses of the National Gallery of Art, an 
increase of $5,392,000 above the fiscal year 2005 level.

            REPAIR, RESTORATION AND RENOVATION OF BUILDINGS




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $10,946,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        16,200,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        16,200,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +5,254,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $16,200,000, the budget request, 
for repair, restoration and renovation of buildings at the 
National Gallery of Art, an increase of $5,254,000 above the 
fiscal year 2005 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, 2005...........................       $16,914,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        17,800,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        17,800,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +886,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $17,800,000 for operations and 
maintenance, the same as the budget request and $886,000 above 
the enacted level.

                              CONSTRUCTION




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $16,107,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        15,200,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        10,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        -6,107,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        -5,200,000


    The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for construction, a 
decrease of $6,107,000 below the enacted level and $5,200,000 
below the budget request.
    Oversight.--The Committee directed the General 
Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct an accounting of how the 
Kennedy Center has managed the $204 million in construction 
funds provided since 1995 to deal with life safety issues, ADA 
compliance issues, and other major construction needs. As in 
previous reports, the GAO raised concerns about construction 
management, including significant and consistent cost overruns, 
unresolved life safety issues, and potential fire safety 
problems.
    In the past, the Committee has given the Kennedy Center 
great flexibility in how it manages Federal construction funds. 
However, this fexibility has resulted in incomplete life safety 
projects and incomplete construction projects, such as the 
Eisenhower Theatre. Managing taxpayer dollars effectively and 
efficiently as well as ensuring the safety of its patrons 
should be the Center's highest priorities.
    The Kennedy Center has stated that their priority is to not 
interrupt performances schedules. This is reasonable only if 
construction projects are managed to avoid significant cost 
overruns. If the cost-overrun trend continues, the Center will 
have to provide the balance of funds needed to complete these 
projects from non-Federal sources.
    In the meantime, the Committee strongly encourages the 
Kennedy Center to implement the GAO recommendations. In 
particular, future budgets will be required to tie funds 
requested to specific projects and timelines, similar to other 
agencies funded in this bill. The Committee also directs the 
Kennedy Center to make use of the Smithsonian Inspector General 
for annual oversight and provide quarterly reports to the 
Committee on the status of all construction projects.
    In an effort to resolve the different approaches between 
GAO and the Kennedy Center regarding fire safety issues, the 
Committee directs the Kennedy Center to contract with the 
General Services Administration for a qualified, third party 
opinion on the situation at the Center and report those 
findings to the Committee.
    The GAO recommendations are as follows:
    ``1. We recommend that the Chairman of the Board of 
Trustees for the Kennedy Center exercise greater oversight of 
the Center's management through the Board of Trustees. The 
Kennedy Center should work with the Smithsonian OIG, or another 
independent federal government oversight organization, to 
provide strategic and annual audits, plans for ongoing 
oversight of the Kennedy Center's use of Federal funds based on 
an analysis of risk, safety, and vulnerability to internal 
control weaknesses. These plans should also specify the audits 
to be provided on a reimbursable basis by the Smithsonian OIG 
or another independent Federal government oversight 
organization.
    2. To ensure the safety of the Kennedy Center, we recommend 
that the Chairman of the Board of Trustees direct the President 
of the Kennedy Center to implement the following two 
recommendations:
    a. Take steps to better comply with the fire safety code. 
At a minimum, these steps should include fully implementing the 
conditions of the modeling study, ensuring that doors in key 
areas provide adequate separation from fire, and addressing the 
code deficiencies at the Millennium Stages.
    b. Promptly seek peer review by a knowledgeable third party 
of the egress and fire modeling study used as a substitute for 
prescriptive code solutions and implement any recommendations. 
Additionally, consult with recognized experts, such as GSA, to 
determine whether the Kennedy Center is fully adhering to 
prevailing professional practices regarding fire life safety 
issues.
    3. To better align the Kennedy Center's management of 
capital projects, we recommend that the Chairman of the Board 
of Trustees direct the President of the Kennedy Center to 
implement the following five recommendations:
    a. Provide more timely and accurate information about 
capital projects by detailing their budget, scope, cost, and 
schedule, and providing to stakeholders an annual 
reconciliation of the status of all planned, delayed, 
eliminated, and actual projects.
    b. Take steps to control cost growth and schedule changes 
in future capital projects by setting more flexible schedules 
and improving its management of contract modifications.
    c. Strengthen the Kennedy Center's financial management 
controls by designing and implementing comprehensive contract, 
financial, and project management policies and procedures in 
accordance with prescribed Federal guidance. These policies and 
procedures should ensure that:
     the Project Management Office prepares inspection 
reports, or similar documents, when services are performed that 
include a description of the services performed and the date(s) 
or period of performance and use this information to verify the 
validity of contractors' invoices;
     complete, up to date costs for construction and 
other services are recognized and used to prepare quarterly 
financial reports and manage project costs;
     reasonable efforts are made to match invoices with 
inspection reports and previously paid invoices to prevent or 
detect duplicate payments;
     contractors' invoices meet minimum requirements 
and contain sufficient detailed information to clearly support 
the accuracy and validity of invoices; and
     for Economy Act transactions, payments to other 
Federal agencies are for actual costs consistent with the 
Economy Act agreement.
    d. Establish and enforce a documents retention policy that 
allows for accountability of the Kennedy Center's Federal 
funds;
    e. Have relevant Kennedy Center offices develop as built 
drawings and better track future changes to the Center.''
    The Kennedy Center should report to the Committee by 
February 15, 2006, and again on December 15, 2006, on the 
status of implementing the GAO recommendations.

            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, 2005...........................        $8,863,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         9,201,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         9,085,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +222,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................          -116,000


    The Committee recommends $9,085,000 for salaries and 
expenses, $116,000 below the budget request and $222,000 above 
the 2005 enacted level. This increase is 2.5% above the enacted 
funding level.

           National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities


                    National Endowment for the Arts


                       GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $121,264,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       121,264,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       121,264,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................                 0
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $121,264,000 for the National 
Endowment for the Arts, the same as the budget request and the 
2005 enacted level.
    Bill language is included, under Title IV--General 
Provisions, retaining provisions in last year's bill regarding 
restrictions on individual grants, subgranting, and seasonal 
support; authority to solicit and invest funds; priority for 
rural and underserved communities; priority for grants that 
encourage public knowledge, education, understanding, and 
appreciation of the arts; designation of a category for grants 
of national significance; and a 15 percent cap on the total 
amount of grant funds directed to any one State.

                 National Endowment for the Humanities


                       GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................      $122,156,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................       122,605,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................       122,605,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +449,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


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


    The Committee recommends $122,605,000 for grants and 
administration, the same as the budget request and $449,000 
above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level.

                            MATCHING GRANTS




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $15,898,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        15,449,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        15,449,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          -449,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $15,449,000 for matching grants, 
the same as the budget request and the fiscal year 2005 level.

                        Commission of Fine Arts

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

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $1,768,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         1,893,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         1,893,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +125,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $1,893,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Commission of Fine Arts, as requested, an 
increase of $125,000 over the enacted funding level.

               NATIONAL CAPITAL ARTS AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $6,902,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         7,000,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         7,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................           +98,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 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 $7,000,000, an increase of $98,000 above the 2005 
level and the same as the budget request. The Committee accepts 
the Administration's proposal to limit grants to $400,000 in a 
single year.

               Advisory Council on Historic Preservation


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 established 
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The 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, 2005...........................        $4,536,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         4,988,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         4,860,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +324,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................          -128,000


    The Committee recommends $4,860,000 for salaries and 
expenses of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, a 
decrease of $128,000 below the budget request and $324,000 
above the enacted level.

                  National Capital Planning Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

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




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................        $7,888,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................         8,344,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................         8,177,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +289,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................          -167,000


    The Committee recommends $8,177,000, for salaries and 
expenses of the National Capital Planning Commission, a 
decrease of $167,000 below the budget request and an increase 
of $289,000 above the enacted level. The Committee has included 
bill language allowing the use of up to one-quarter of one 
percent of funding for official representational activities to 
be used only when hosting international visitors associated 
with the international capitals working group.

                United States Holocaust Memorial Museum


                       HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM

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




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $40,858,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        43,233,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        41,880,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................        +1,022,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................        -1,353,000


    The Committee recommends $41,880,000 for the Holocaust 
Memorial Museum, a decrease of $1,353,000 below the budget 
request and $1,022,000 above the enacted level. This increase 
is 2.5% above the enacted funding level. The Committee 
encourages the Council to keep the Committee informed of 
substantive work plan changes and to inform the Committee if 
there is a need to move maintenance funds to repair damages to 
the Ross office building.

                             Presidio Trust


                          PRESIDIO TRUST FUND




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................       $19,722,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................        20,000,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................        20,000,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................          +278,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 0


    The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for the Presidio Trust 
fund, the same as the budget request and $278,000 above the 
enacted level.

      White House Commission on the National Moment of Remembrance


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES




Appropriation enacted, 2005...........................          $248,000
Budget estimate, 2006.................................           250,000
Recommended, 2006.....................................           250,000
Comparison:
    Appropriation, 2005...............................            +2,000
    Budget estimate, 2006.............................                 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 $250,000, an 
increase of $2,000 above the fiscal year 2005 enacted level and 
the same as the level requested by the President.

                      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 continues a provision limiting the sale of 
giant sequoia.
    Section 407 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 408 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 409 continues a provision specifying reforms and 
limitations dealing with the National Endowment for the Arts.
    Section 410 continues a provision permitting the collection 
and use of private funds by the National Endowment for the Arts 
and the National Endowment for the Humanities.
    Section 411 continues direction to the National Endowment 
for the Arts on funding distribution.
    Section 412 continues a limitation on completing and 
issuing the five-year program under the Forest and Rangeland 
Renewable Resources Planning Act.
    Section 413 continues a provision prohibiting the use of 
funds to support government-wide administrative functions 
unless they are justified in the budget process and approved by 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations.
    Section 414 continues a provision permitting the Forest 
Service to use the roads and trails fund for backlog 
maintenance and priority forest health treatments.
    Section 415 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 416 continues a provision clarifying the Forest 
Service land management planning revision requirements.
    Section 417 continues a provision limiting preleasing, 
leasing, and related activities within the boundaries of 
National monuments.
    Section 418 extends the Forest Service Conveyances Pilot 
Program.
    Section 419 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 420 continues a provision prohibiting the transfer 
of funds to other agencies other than provided in this Act.
    Section 421 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 422 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 423 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 424 requires overhead charges, deductions, reserves 
or holdbacks to be presented in annual budget justifications, 
with changes presented to the Appropriations Committees for 
approval.
    Section 425 prohibits the expenditure of funds on Safecom 
and Disaster Management.
    Section 426 limits contracts for the operation of the 
National Recreational Reservation Center.
    Section 427 enhances Forest Service administration of 
rights-of-way and land uses.
    Section 428 extends the authorization for the Service First 
program.
    Section 429 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 430 requires a report of the expenditure of funds 
pursuant to the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act.
    Section 431 continues a legislative provision limiting 
funds for oil and gas leasing or permitting on the Finger Lakes 
National Forest, NY.

                              Rescissions

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

                                                                 Amounts
                                                         recommended for
        Department and activity                               rescission
Department of the Interior: Land and Water Conservation 
    Fund (contract authority)...........................     $30,000,000
Environmental Protection Agency: various accounts 
    (rescissions are under State and Tribal Assistance 
    Grants heading).....................................     100,000,000

                           Transfers of Funds

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

                                 APPROPRIATION TRANSFERS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Account to which transfer is to be
    Account from which transfer is to be made        Amount                    made                    Amount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land          $9,000,000  Department of Agriculture, U.S.       $9,000,000
 Management, Wildland Fire Management.                           Forest Service, Wildland Fire
                                                                 Management.
Environmental Protection Agency, Hazardous          13,536,000  Office of Inspector General.......    13,536,000
 Substance Superfund.
Environmental Protection Agency, Hazardous          30,605,000  Science and Technology............    30,605,000
 Substance Superfund.
Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service,      9,000,000  Department of the Interior, Bureau     9,000,000
 Wildland Fire Management.                                       of Land Management, 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

    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.
    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.
    Limiting official entertainment or reception and 
representation expenses for selected agencies in the bill.
    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

    Permitting the use of receipts from the Land and Water 
Conservation Act of 1965.
    Providing funds to the National Fish and Wildlife 
Foundation under certain conditions.
    Permitting the use of fees from communication site rentals.
    Permitting the collection of fees for processing mining 
applications and for certain public land uses.
    Permitting the use of mining fee collections for program 
operations.
    Providing for a Youth Conservation Corp.

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

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

                   OREGON AND CALIFORNIA GRANT LANDS

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

               FOREST ECOSYSTEMS HEALTH AND RECOVERY FUND

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

                         RANGE IMPROVEMENT FUND

    Providing for the use of receipts for the range improvement 
fund.

               SERVICE CHARGES, DEPOSITS, AND FORFEITURES

    Allowing the use of service charges, deposits and 
forfeitures funds on any damaged public lands.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Permitting the payment of rewards for information on 
violations of law on Bureau lands
    Providing for costsharing arrangements for printing 
services.

                United States Fish and Wildlife Service


                          RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

    Allowing for the maintenance of the herd of longhorned 
cattle on the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Refuge. Without this 
language, the longhorned cattle would have to be removed from 
the refuge.
    Providing for the Natural Communities Conservation Planning 
program and for a Youth Conservation Corps.
    Limiting funding for certain Endangered Species Act listing 
programs.
    Permitting payment for information or rewards in the law 
enforcement program.
    Earmarking funds for contaminant analysis.

                      LANDOWNER INCENTIVE PROGRAM

    Providing matching landowner incentive grants to States and 
territories.

                   PRIVATE STEWARDSHIP GRANTS PROGRAM

    Providing private stewardship grants for private 
conservation efforts.

                      STATE TRIBAL WILDLIFE GRANTS

    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.

                              CONSTRUCTION

    Providing for repair of damage to public roads.

                            LAND ACQUISITION

    Providing options for the purchase of land not to exceed 
$1.
    Prohibiting the use of land acquisition project funds for 
certain administrative expenses.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Providing for installation of certain recreation 
facilities.
    Permitting the maintenance and improvement of aquaria and 
other facilities.
    Permitting costshared arrangements for printing services.
    Permitting the use of funds for employment related legal 
services.
    Permitting the acceptance of donated aircraft.
    Limiting the use of funds for establishing new refuges.

                         National Park Service


                 OPERATION OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM

    Allowing road maintenance service to trucking permitees 
reimbursable basis. This provision has been included in in 
annual appropriations Acts since 1954.
    Providing for a Youth Conservation Corps program.

                       UNITED STATES PARK POLICE

    Permitting reimbursement to the Park Police for special 
events under limited circumstances.

                  NATIONAL RECREATION AND PRESERVATION

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

                       HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND

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

                              CONSTRUCTION

    Limiting funds for Park Service Partnership projects with 
certain exceptions.
    Limiting donation or services associated with new 
facilities.
    Limiting funds for certain facilities at the Washington 
Monument.
    Providing funds for modified water deliveries to Everglades 
National Park with certain restrictions.
    Limiting funds for Dayton Aviation Heritage National 
Historical Park.

                    LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND

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

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Limiting funds for grants and contracts that don't include 
the text of 18 U.S.C. 1913.
    Preventing the implementation of an agreement for the 
redevelopment of the southern end of Ellis Island.
    Allowing funds to be used to maintain certain parts of the 
District of Columbia near the White House.
    Limiting the use of funds for the United Nation's 
Biodiversity Convention.
    Permitting the use of funds for workplace safety needs.
    Authorizing reimbursable agreements in advance of receipt 
of funds.
    Allowing the Secretary of the Interior to appeal value 
determinations.
    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

    Providing for two-year availability of funds for biological 
research and for the operations of cooperative research units.
    62. Prohibiting the conduct of new surveys on private 
property without permission.
    Requiring cost sharing for cooperative topographic mapping 
and water resource data collection activities.
    Permitting reimbursement of funds to the General Services 
Administration for security services.
    Permitting contracting for certain mapping and surveys.
    Permitting construction of facilities.
    Permitting acquisition of land for certain uses.
    Allowing payment of expenses for the National Committee on 
Geology.
    Permitting payments to interstate compact negotiators.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Permitting the use of certain contracts, grants, and 
cooperative agreements.
    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

    Permitting the use of excess receipts from Outer 
Continental Shelf leasing activities.
    Providing for reasonable expenses related to volunteer 
beach and marine cleanup activities.
    Providing for refunds for overpayments on Indian allottee 
leases.
    Providing for collecting royalties and late payment 
interest on amounts received in settlements associated with 
Federal and Indian leases.
    Permitting the use of revenues from a royalty-in-kind 
program.
    Providing that royalty-in-kind be equal to, or greater 
than, royalty-in-value.

          Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement


                       REGULATION AND TECHNOLOGY

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

                    ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION FUND

    Earmarking Abandoned Mine Reclamation funds for acid mine 
drainage.
    Limiting grants to minimum program States.
    Allowing the use of debt recovery to pay for debt 
collection.
    Reallocates 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), which has not been used in 10 years, to the federal 
share portion of the fund (section 402(g)(3)).
    Allowing funds to be used for travel expenses while 
attending training.

                        Bureau of Indian Affairs


                      OPERATION OF INDIAN PROGRAMS

    Limiting funds for contract support costs and for 
administrative cost grants for schools.
    Permitting the use of tribal priority allocations for 
general assistance payments to individuals, for contract 
support costs, and for repair and replacement of schools.
    Providing for an Indian self-determination fund.
    Allowing the transfer of certain forestry funds.

                              CONSTRUCTION

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

                   MISCELLANEOUS PAYMENTS TO INDIANS

    Permitting funding for the Quinault Indian Nation boundary 
settlement.

                     INDIAN GUARANTEED LOAN PROGRAM

    Limiting Indian guaranteed loan program funds for loans 
under certain circumstances and providing administrative 
expenses.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Allowing contracting for the San Carlos Irrigation Project.
    Limiting the use of funds for contracts, grants and 
cooperative agreements.
    Allowing tribes to return appropriated funds for 
distribution to other tribes.
    Prohibiting funding of Alaska schools.
    Limiting the number of schools and the expansion of grade 
levels in individual schools.

                          Departmental Offices


               INSULAR AFFAIRS, ASSISTANCE TO TERRITORIES

    Requiring audits of the financial transactions of the 
Territorial governments by the GAO.
    Providing grant funding under certain terms of the 
Agreement of the Special Representatives on Future United 
States Financial Assistance for the Northern Mariana Islands.
    Allowing grants for the Pacific Basin Development Council.
    Providing a grant to the Close Up foundation.
    Providing for capital infrastructure in various 
Territories.
    Allowing appropriations for disaster assistance to be used 
as non-Federal matching funds for hazard mitigation grants.

             DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT, SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    Permitting payments to former Bureau of Mines workers.
    Limiting the establishment of additional reserves in the 
working capital fund.

                       PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES

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

                    CENTRAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS FUND

    Providing that sums received from a party for remedial 
actionsshall be credited to the account, and defining 
nonmonetary payments.

 OFFICE OF SPECIAL TRUSTEE FOR AMERICAN INDIANS, FEDERAL TRUST PROGRAMS

    Limiting the amount of funding available for the historical 
accounting of Indian trust fund accounts.
    Specifying that the statute of limitations shall not 
commence on any claim resulting from trust funds losses.
    Exempting quarterly statements for Indian trust accounts 
less than $1.
    Requiring annual statements and records maintenance for 
Indian trust accounts.
    Limiting use of funds to correct administrative errors in 
Indian trust accounts.
    Permitting the use of recoveries from erroneous payments 
pursuant to Indian trust accounts.

      OFFICE OF SPECIAL TRUSTEE FOR AMERICAN INDIANS, INDIAN LAND 
                             CONSOLIDATION

    Permitting transfers of funds from Indian land 
consolidation for administrative expenses.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

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

             General Provisions, Department of the Interior

    Allowing transfer of funds in certain emergency situations 
and requiring replacement with a supplemental appropriation 
request.
    Permitting the Department to consolidate and receive 
reimbursement for services.
    Restricting various oil and gas preleasing, leasing, 
exploration and drilling activities within the Outer 
Continental Shelf in the Georges Bank North Atlantic planning 
area, Mid Atlantic and South Atlantic planning areas, Eastern 
Gulf of Mexico planning area, North Aleutian Basin planning 
area, Northern, Southern and Central California planning areas, 
and Washington/Oregon planning area.
    Prohibiting fee exemptions for non-local traffic through 
National Parks.
    Permitting the transfer of funds between the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee for American 
Indians.
    Providing for administrative law judges to handle Indian 
probate issues.
    Permitting the redistribution of certain Indian funds with 
limitations.
    Directing allocation of funds for Bureau of Indian Affairs 
funded postsecondary schools.
    Permitting the conveyance of the Twin Cities Research 
Center.
    Allowing the use of helicopters and motor vehicles on 
Sheldon and Hart National Wildlife Refuges.
    Authorizing funding transfers for Shenandoah Valley 
Battlefield NHD and Ice Age NST.
    Prohibiting the closure of the underground lunchroom at 
Carlsbad Caverns NP.
    Prohibiting demolition of the bridge between New Jersey and 
Ellis Island.
    Limiting compensation for the Special Master and Court 
Monitor for the Cobell v. Norton litigation.
    Allowing payment of attorney fees for Federal employees 
related to the Cobell v. Norton litigation.
    Requiring the Fish and Wildlife Service to mark hatchery 
salmon.
    Allowing for the transfer of certain Departmental 
Management funds to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for the 
Midway Island refuge airport.
    Addressing the use of certain Indian lands for gaming 
purposes.
    Preventing funds to study or reduce the water level at Lake 
Powell.
    Limiting the amount of fees that may be collected by the 
National Indian Gaming Commission.
    Providing for a tribal trust demonstration program.
    Providing for the renewal of certain grazing permits in the 
Jardbidge Field office of the Bureau of Land Management.
    Authorizing the acquisition of lands and leases for Ellis 
Island.
    Permitting the Secretary of the Interior to issue grazing 
permits within the Mojave National Preserve.
    Implementing rules concerning winter snowmobile use at 
Yellowstone National Park.
    Limiting staff and funding for the Department of the 
Interior, Office of Law Enforcement and Security.

               TITLE II--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY


                     HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE SUPERFUND

    Providing for the allocation of funds to other Federal 
agencies under certain circumstances.
    Providing for the transfer of funds within certain agency 
accounts.

                   STATE AND TRIBAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS

    Providing for grants to State, Tribal, and local 
governments for school bus services, pollution prevention, 
particulate matter monitoring, and for environmental 
information exchange grants.
    Providing for State authority under Public Law 104-182.
    Exempting limitations on State administration expenses at 
the discretion of the Administrator.
    Providing for administrative expenses for the State 
Revolving Fund.
    Limiting funding for certain United States--Mexico border 
programs under certain conditions.
    Providing for the transfer of special project funds, 
unawarded after 7 years, to the appropriate State Revolving 
Funds.
    Providing that excess funds from completed special projects 
or from projects determined to be ineligible for a grant be 
deposited in State Revolving Funds.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Allowing awards of grants to federally recognized Indian 
tribes.
    Authorizing the collection of pesticide registration 
service fees.
    Providing funds for grants and loans under CERCLA.
    Permitting the Administrator to make up to five scientist 
appointments to the Office of Research and Development.

                      TITLE III--RELATED AGENCIES


                             Forest Service


                       STATE AND PRIVATE FORESTRY

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

                         NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM

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

                        WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

    Allowing the use of wildland fire funds to repay advances 
from other accounts.
    Allowing reimbursement of States for certain wildfire 
emergency activities.
    Requiring 50 percent of any unobligated balances remaining 
at the end of fiscal year 2005, except hazardous fuels funding, 
to be transferred to the Knutson-Vandenberg Fund as repayment 
for past advances.
    Permitting the use of funds for the joint fire science 
program.
    Permitting the use of forest and rangeland research funds 
for fire science research.
    Permitting the use of funds for emergency rehabilitation 
and restoration and hazardous fuels reduction to support 
emergency response and wildfire suppression.
    Providing for grants and cooperative agreements with local 
communities for wildland fires.
    Requiring Committee approval for funding transfers.
    Providing for the transfer of hazardous fuels funding to 
the National Forest System.
    Providing for use of funds on adjacent, non-Federal lands 
for hazard reduction.
    Providing that funds for wildfire suppression shall be 
assessed for indirect costs.
    Providing for the transfer of wildland fire funds between 
the Department of the Interior and the Department of 
Agriculture.

                  CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE

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

                         RANGE BETTERMENT FUND

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

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Providing that proceeds from the sale of aircraft may be 
used to purchase replacement aircraft.
    Allowing funds for certain employment contracts.
    Allowing funds to be used for purchase and alteration of 
buildings.
    Allowing for acquisition of certain lands and interests.
    Allowing expenses for certain volunteer activities.
    Providing for the cost of uniforms.
    Providing for debt collections on certain contracts.
    Prohibiting the demolition or closing of regional offices.
    Permitting the transfer of funds for emergency firefighting 
from other forest service accounts under certain circumstances.
    Providing that the first transfer of funds for emergency 
firefighting shall include land acquisition and forest legacy 
funds.
    Allowing funds to be used through the Agency for 
International Development and the Foreign Agricultural Service 
for work in foreign countries and to support other forestry 
activities outside of the United States.
    Prohibiting the transfer of funds under the Department of 
Agriculture transfer authority under certain conditions.
    Prohibiting reprogramming of funds without approval.
    Limiting funds to be transferred to the USDA Working 
Capital Fund.
    Providing for a Youth Conservation Corps program.
    Providing for matching funds and administrative expenses 
for the National Forest Foundation and matching funds for the 
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.
    Providing funds for sustainable rural development.
    Allowing the limited use of funds for law enforcement 
emergencies.
    Providing Federal employee status for certain individuals 
employed under the Older American Act of 1965.
    Permitting the use of funds for education of dependents of 
personnel stationed in Puerto Rico.

                         Indian Health Service


                         INDIAN HEALTH SERVICES

    Providing that certain contracts and grants may be 
performed in two fiscal years.
    Exempting certain Tribal funding from fiscal year 
constraints.
    Limiting funds for catastrophic care, loan repayment and 
certain contracts.
    Limiting contract support cost spending.
    Providing for use of collections and reporting of 
collections under Title IV of the Indian Health Care 
Improvement Act.
    Permitting the use of Indian Health Care Improvement Fund 
monies for facilities improvement.
    Providing for the collection of individually identifiable 
health information relating to the Americans with Disabilities 
Act by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
    Limiting the use of funds for tribal courts.
    Limiting the use of funds for overhead expenses.

                        INDIAN HEALTH FACILITIES

    Providing that facilities funds may be used to purchase 
land, modular buildings and trailers.
    Providing for TRANSAM equipment to be purchased from the 
Department of Defense.
    Prohibiting the use of funds for sanitation facilities for 
new homes funded by the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development.
    Allowing for the purchase of ambulances.
    Providing authority for contracts for small ambulatory 
facilities.
    Providing for land purchases for facilities in Alaska.
    Providing for certain purchases and for a demolition fund.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Providing for payments for telephone service in private 
residences in the field, purchase of motor vehicles, aircraft 
and reprints.
    Providing for purchase and erection of portable buildings.
    Providing funds for uniforms.
    Allowing funding for attendance at professional meetings.
    Providing that health care may be extended to non-Indians 
at Indian Health Service facilities.
    Providing that funds are not available for assessments by 
the Department of Health and Human Services.
    Allowing deobligation and reobligation of funds applied to 
self-governance funding agreements.
    Exempting certain activities from Federal transportation 
limitations.
    Providing a limitation on the number of personnel at 
certain facilities.
    Prohibiting the expenditure of funds to implement new 
eligibility regulations.
    Providing that reimbursements for training provide total 
costs.
    Providing that funds be apportioned only in the 
appropriation structure in this Act.
    Prohibiting changing the appropriations structure without 
approval of the Appropriations Committees.

            Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry


            TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC HEALTH

    Providing for the conduct of health studies, testing, and 
monitoring.
    Providing deadlines for health assessments and studies.
    Limiting the number of toxicological profiles.

                   Executive Office of the President


  COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AND OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

    Authorizing the appointment and duties of the chairman.

             Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    Limiting the number of senior level positions.
    Authorizing the appointment of the inspector general of the 
board.
    Limiting the appointment of individuals to positions within 
the board.

              Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

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

    Providing that funds may be used to support American 
overseas research centers.
    Allowing for advance payments to independent contractors 
performing research services or participating in official 
Smithsonian presentations.
    Permitting the use of certain funds for the Victor 
Building.

                           FACILITIES CAPITAL

    Permitting the Smithsonian Institution to select 
contractors for certain purposes on the basis of contractor 
qualifications as well as price.

                       ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

    Precluding any changes to the Smithsonian science program 
without prior approval of the Board of Regents.
    Limiting the design or expansion of current space or 
facilities without prior approval of the Committee.
    Limiting the use of funds for the Holt House.
    Limiting reprogramming of funds.
    Prohibiting purchase of buildings without prior 
consultation.

                        National Gallery of Art


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    Allowing payment in advance for membership in library, 
museum, and art associations or societies.
    Providing uniform allowances and for restoration and repair 
of works of art by contract without advertising.
    Providing no-year availability of funds for special 
exhibitions.

            REPAIR, RESTORATION, AND RENOVATION OF BUILDINGS

    Permitting the Gallery to perform work by contract or 
otherwise and to select contractors for certain purposes on the 
basis of contractor qualifications as well as price.
    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

    Permitting transfer of funds within certain accounts.

         NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES, MATCHING GRANTS

    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

    Limiting the use of funds for grants and contracts which do 
not include the text of 18 U.S.C. 1913; requiring certain 
language in contracts and grants; and permitting the use of 
nonappropriated funds for reception expenses.
    Prohibiting the use of funds for official reception and 
representation.
    Allowing the chairperson of the National Endowment for the 
Arts to approve small grants under limited circumstances.

                        Commission of Fine Arts


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    Permitting the charging and use of fees for its 
publications.

               NATIONAL CAPITAL ARTS AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS

    Limiting the amount of grants awarded to an organization in 
a single year.

               Advisory Council on Historic Preservation


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    Restricting hiring at Executive Level V or higher.

                  National Capital Planning Commission


                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

    Allowing certain funds to be used for official 
representation expenses.

                      TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Providing for availability of information on consulting 
services contracts.
    Prohibiting the use of funds to distribute literature 
either to promote or oppose legislative proposals on which 
Congressional action is incomplete.
    Specifying that funds are for one year unless provided 
otherwise.
    Prohibiting the use of funds to provide personal cooks, 
chauffeurs or other personal servants to any office or 
employee.
    Prohibiting assessments against programs funded in this 
bill.
    Prohibiting the sale of giant sequoia trees in a manner 
different from 2004.
    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.
    Limiting the use of funds for contract support costs on 
Indian contracts.
    Making reforms in the National Endowment for the Arts, 
including funding distribution reforms.
    Permitting the National Endowments for the Arts and the 
Humanities to collect, invest and use private donations.
    Limiting funds for completing or issuing the five-year 
program under the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources 
Planning Act.
    Limiting the use of funds for any government-wide 
administrative functions.
    Permitting the use of forest service road and trail funds 
for maintenance and forest health.
    Limiting the use of telephone answering machines.
    Clarifying the forest service land management planning 
revision requirements.
    Limiting leasing and preleasing activities within National 
Monuments.
    Extending and expanding the pilot program allowing the 
forest service to dispose of certain excess structures and 
reinvest the proceeds for maintenance and rehabilitation.
    Providing 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.
    Prohibiting the transfer of funds to other agencies other 
than provided in this Act.
    Providing contracting and grant authority for hazardous 
fuel projects in forest-dependent rural communities.
    Providing certain limitation of funds for Federal land 
takings excluding those under the Everglades National Park 
Protection and Expansion Act.
    Limiting the use of funds for competitive sourcing studies.
    Requiring display of certain information for government-
wide activities in budget justifications.
    Limiting contracts for the operation of the National 
Recreational Reservation Service.
    Prohibiting use of funds for certain government-wide 
activities.
    Enhancing forest service administration of rights-of-way 
and land uses.
    Extending the authorization for the Service First program.
    Providing for the exchange of lands in San Bernardino, 
California, to relocate the forest supervisor's office.
    Requiring a report on the expenditure of funds pursuant to 
the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act.
    Limiting the use of funds to prepare or issue permits or 
leases for oil and gas drilling in the Finger Lakes National 
Forest, NY.

                  APPROPRIATIONS NOT AUTHORIZED BY LAW

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

                                             [Dollars in thousands]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Appropriations
                                         Last year of                              in last year   Appropriations
                                        authorization     Authorization level           of         in this bill
                                                                                   authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bureau of Land Management:
    All discretionary programs........          2002   Such sums as may be           $1,681,437      $1,755,115
                                                        necessary.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Resource Management:
    Endangered Species Act Amendments           1992   $41,500..................         35,721         146,909
     of 1988.
    Great Lakes Fish & Wildlife                 2004   4,000....................            498             500
     Restoration Grants.
    Marine Mammal Protection Act                1999   10,296...................          2,008           4,485
     Amendments of 1994.
Fisheries Restoration Irrigation                2005   25,000...................          2,000           3,000
 Mitigation Act
Great Ape Conservation                          2005   5,000....................          1,381           1,400
Neotropical Migratory Birds                     2005   5,000....................          3,944           4,000

Environmental Protection Agency

Hazardous Substance Superfund.........          1994   5,100,000................      1,480,853       1,258,333
State and Tribal Assistance Grants:
    Alaska Native Villages............          1979   2,000....................             NA          15,000
    Clean Water SRF...................          1992   1,800,000................      2,400,000         850,000
    Drinking Water SRF................          2003   1,000,000................        844,500         850,000
    Clean Air Act.....................          1997   Such sums as may be              167,230         234,600
                                                        necessary.
    Radon Abatement Act...............          1991   10,000...................          9,000           8,150
    Clean Water Act (FWPCA)...........          1991   .........................             NA         426,000
    BEACH Act.........................          2005   30,000...................          9,920          10,000
    Safe Drinking Water Act...........          2003   115,000..................        108,343         116,600
    Solid Waste Disposal Act (RCRA)...          1988   70,000...................         71,391         104,400
    Toxic Substances Control Act......          1983   1,500....................          5,100          18,850
    Pollution Prevention Act..........          1993   8,000....................          6,800           5,000
    Indian Environmental General                1998   Such sums as may be               38,585          57,500
     Assistance Program Act.                            necessary.
    LUST Trust Fund...................          1988   10,000...................         14,400          11,950
National Forest Foundation............          1998   1,000....................          1,000           3,000
National Endowment for the Arts.......          1993   Such sums as may be              174,460         121,264
                                                        necessary.
National Endowment for the Humanities.          1993   Such sums as may be              177,403         138,054
                                                        necessary.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.

         Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

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

                          Full Committee Votes

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

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

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

SECTION 331, SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b), OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2000 (AS CONTAINED IN DIVISION 
                        C OF PUBLIC LAW 106-113)

    Sec. 331. Enhancing Forest Service Administration of 
Rights-of-way and Land Uses. (a) The Secretary of Agriculture 
shall develop and implement a pilot program for the purpose of 
enhancing forest service administration of rights-of-way and 
other land uses. The authority for this program shall be for 
fiscal years 2000 through [2005] 2009. Prior to the expiration 
of the authority for this pilot program, the Secretary shall 
submit a report to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations, and the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Resources of the 
House of Representatives that evaluates whether the use of 
funds under this section resulted in more expeditious approval 
of rights-of-way and special use authorizations. This report 
shall include the Secretary's recommendation for statutory or 
regulatory changes to reduce the average processing time for 
rights-of-way and special use permit applications.
    (b) Deposit of Fees.--Subject to subsections (a) and (f), 
during fiscal years 2000 through [2005] 2009, the Secretary of 
Agriculture shall deposit into a special account established in 
the Treasury all fees collected by the Secretary to recover the 
costs of processing applications for, and monitoring compliance 
with, authorizations to use and occupy National Forest System 
lands pursuant to section 28(1) of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 
U.S.C. 185(1)), section 504(g) of the Federal Land Policy and 
Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.1764(g)), section 9701 of 
title 31, United States Code, and section 110(g) of the 
National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470h-2(g)).

  SECTION 329 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES 
 APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2002, AS AMENDED (16 U.S.C. 580 NOTE; PUBLIC LAW 
                          107-63, AS AMENDED)

    Sec. 329. (a) Pilot Program Authorizing Conveyance of 
Excess Forest Service Structures.--The Secretary of Agriculture 
may convey, by sale or exchange, any or all right, title, and 
interest of the United States in and to excess buildings and 
other structures located on National Forest System lands and 
under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service. The conveyance 
may include the land on which the building or other structure 
is located and such other land immediately adjacent to the 
building or structure as the Secretary considers necessary.
    (b) Limitation.--Conveyances on not more than [40] 60 sites 
may be made under the authority of this section, and the 
Secretary of Agriculture shall obtain the concurrence of the 
Committee on Appropriations of the House Representatives and 
the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate in advance of 
each conveyance.
    (c) Use of Proceeds.--The proceeds derived from the sale of 
a building or other structure under this section shall be 
retained by the Secretary of Agriculture and shall be available 
to the Secretary, without further appropriation until expended, 
for maintenance and rehabilitation activities within the Forest 
Service Region in which the building or structure is located. 
Additionally, proceeds from the sale of conveyances on no more 
than [13] 25 sites shall be available for construction of 
replacement facilities.
    (d) Duration of Authority.--The authority provided by this 
section expires on September 30, [2008] 2009.

  SECTION 330 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES 
     APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001, (PUBLIC LAW 106-291, 114 STAT. 996)

    Sec. 330. In fiscal years 2001 through [2005] 2008, the 
Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture may pilot test 
agency-wide joint permitting and leasing programs, subject to 
annual review of Congress, and promulgate special rules as 
needed to test the feasibility of issuing unified permits, 
applications, and leases. The Secretaries of the Interior and 
Agriculture may make reciprocal delegations of their respective 
authorities, duties and responsibilities in support of the 
``Service First'' initiative agency-wide to promote customer 
service and efficiency. Nothing herein shall alter, expand or 
limit the applicability of any public law or regulation to 
lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management, National 
Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service or the Forest Service. 
To facilitate the sharing of resources under the Service First 
initiative, the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture may 
make transfers of funds and reimbursement of funds on an annual 
basis among the land management agencies referred to in this 
section, except that this authority may not be used to 
circumvent requirements and limitations imposed on the use of 
funds.

                    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)......................           $26,107
Outlays:
    Fiscal year 2006..................................            27,496
    Fiscal year 2007..................................            16,037
    Fiscal year 2008..................................             5,609
    Fiscal year 2009..................................             2,469
    Fiscal year 2010..................................             1,258


               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..................................            $5,534
Fiscal year 2006 outlays resulting therefrom..........             2,241


                                                        
                                                        
              ADDITIONAL VIEWS OF THE HONORABLE DAVID OBEY

    As the Ranking Minority Member of the Appropriations 
Committee, I cannot fault the fairness of the process followed 
by our Committee in producing the fiscal year 2006 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. This bill's principal responsibility is 
to provide for the environmental and conservation needs of 
America's people and its natural resources. Notwithstanding 
increases in a few critical areas, the FY 2006 Interior bill as 
currently presented simply does not fulfill that 
responsibility. Because of these failures, American families 
will be exposed unnecessarily to dirtier water and air and to 
the poisons of toxic Superfund sites. Because of its failures, 
many of America's pristine natural landscapes and historic 
structures, as well as the variety of its wildlife, may be lost 
to future generations.
    The Interior bill's failings did not occur by accident. The 
overall lack of funds to address national needs is the direct 
and inevitable result of the vote cast last month to approve a 
Republican Budget Resolution for 2006 that provides $11.7 
billion less than the amount necessary just to maintain current 
service levels for domestic programs. As Majority Leader Tom 
Delay pointed out last month during debate on the Conference 
Report on the Budget Resolution,

          This is the budget that the American people voted for 
        when they returned a Republican House, a Republican 
        Senate and a Republican White House last November.

After Republicans voted 218-12 in favor of a Budget Resolution 
with inadequate resources for domestic programs, I believe it 
is disingenuous for them to defend the Interior appropriations 
bill by saying, ``We did the best we could with an inadequate 
allocation.'' The Republican Members had a choice and they 
voted for the discretionary spending total which they now say 
forces these destructive choices. Not one Democrat voted for 
the current Budget Resolution because we understood the damage 
to essential services which it would cause. The 2006 Interior 
bill now presented to the House epitomizes the draconian 
results of the Republican fiscal philosophy which espouses 
super-sized tax cuts for the most well-off over critical 
priorities like protecting the environment.
    Among the many failings of the Interior bill reported by 
the Committee, the most destructive are its severe reductions 
in funding for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I am 
especially disturbed that the Interior Subcommittee, without a 
single hearing, has recommended cutting the Clean Water State 
Revolving Fund by $242 million below the 2005 funding level. 
This program serves every state and almost every community in 
this country. But, without a word of testimony by the EPA or 
affected communities, the Committee has cut the Clean Water 
Fund by more than 20 percent this year and by almost 40 percent 
over the last two years. If the Interior bill is approved as 
currently drafted, the $850 million provided in 2006 will be 
the lowest level of new capital assistance for this revolving 
fund since 1989. Majority Leader Delay was right.

          This is the budget that the American people voted for 
        when they returned a Republican House, a Republican 
        Senate and a Republican White House last November.

    The need for investment in this country's water systems is 
well documented and enormous. Two years ago EPA Administrator 
Whitman issued a formal report, entitled the ``Water Gap 
Analysis,'' which estimated the twenty-year fiscal shortfall 
between what we are currently spending and what is required at 
$388 billion. Everyone agrees that the Clean Water SRF program 
works. Over the last 16 years $21 billion of appropriations for 
the Clean Water SRF have generated $52 billion of construction 
projects in every state and in literally thousands of 
communities.
    The impact of the cut to the SRF recommended in the current 
bill on local communities will be very visible. Projects that 
have already been approved by State water authorities for 
future funding will, inevitably, be rejected, scaled back, or 
substantially delayed. A table showing the impact of these cuts 
to each state is included at the end of these remarks. As 
Members review this table for its impact on their own states, 
they should remember Majority Leader Delay's prescient 
statement last month,

          This is the budget that the American people voted for 
        when they returned a Republican House, a Republican 
        Senate and a Republican White House last November.

    I am also very concerned by the decision reflected in this 
bill to reduce funding for environmental enforcement activities 
of the EPA by $12 million. I wish that every private company, 
every public utility company and every community water and 
sewer authority would willingly comply with the Clean Air Act 
and the Clean Water Act. I wish every industrial polluter who 
had dumped toxic PCB's and other chemicals into our rivers or 
buried them in dumps outside their factories would 
enthusiastically clean up their Superfund sites. Unfortunately, 
35 years of experience has taught us that aggressive 
enforcement is needed if we are to get compliance with our 
environmental laws. Enforcement has resulted in settlements 
with coal burning power plants that have cut emissions of 
sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides by nearly a million tons, 
reducing asthma attacks, lung disease and acid rain. Compliance 
agreements or enforcement orders with water and sewer 
authorities in cities across the United States have prevented 
billions of gallons of raw sewage from seeping into water 
supplies by requiring installation of upgrades at treatment 
plants. Members should not be surprised by these cutbacks in 
important environmental enforcement activities because Majority 
Delay was candid when he told us,

          This is the budget that the American people voted for 
        when they returned a Republican House, a Republican 
        Senate and a Republican White House last November.

    Not all the cuts in this bill are an artifact of it's 
allocation. Some reflect ideological positions of the 
Subcommittee Chairman with which I very much disagree. In my 
opinion, the Chairman's recommendation to eliminate $190 
million of Land and Water Conservation funding, including 
funding for all new federal land acquisitions as well as all 
assistance to States, is a mistake for the country and for the 
Congress. The American people recognize the need to preserve 
the remaining natural landscapes of this country for future 
generations. Those of us who visit our national parks and 
refuges know how precious they are. Five years ago 315 members 
of the House voted to make these programs an entitlement under 
the CARA bill because Congress didn't keep its word to 
adequately fund conservation programs. The Subcommittee 
Chairman certainly has a right to his sincerely held views 
regarding land conservation programs, but I do not believe that 
his recommendation to eliminate all funding for the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund, as reflected in this bill, represents 
the will of the House.
    As I have noted throughout these remarks, these failings 
did not occur by accident, The Majority Leader of the House, 
Tom Delay, explained the reason for these cuts last month on 
the floor when the House adopted the Budget Resolution for 
2006.

          This is the budget that the American people voted for 
        when they returned a Republican House, a Republican 
        Senate and a Republican White House last November.

    The FY 2006 Interior bill as reported to the House is not a 
bill that I believe Members of Congress can go home and tell 
people with a straight face, ``We did the right thing.''
    I will not vote for it.