79–006

106TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 106–806

PACIFIC SALMON RECOVERY ACT

SEPTEMBER 6, 2000.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State

of the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources,

submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H.R. 2798]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill

(H.R. 2798) to authorize the Secretary of Commerce to provide financial assistance to the States of Alaska, Washington, Oregon,

and California for salmon habitat restoration projects in coastal

waters and upland drainages, having considered the same, report

favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill

as amended do pass.

The amendment is as follows:

Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Pacific Salmon Recovery Act’’.

SEC. 2. SALMON CONSERVATION AND SALMON HABITAT RESTORATION ASSISTANCE.

(a) REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE.—Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary of Commerce shall provide financial assistance in accordance with this Act to qualified States and qualified tribal governments for salmon

conservation and salmon habitat restoration activities.

(b) ALLOCATION.—Of the amounts available to provide assistance under this section each fiscal year (after the application of section 3(g)), the Secretary—

(1) shall allocate 85 percent among qualified States, in equal amounts; and

(2) shall allocate 15 percent among qualified tribal governments, in amounts

determined by the Secretary.

(c) TRANSFER.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall promptly transfer—

(A) to a qualified State that has submitted a Conservation and Restoration Plan under section 3(a) amounts allocated to the qualified State under

subsection (b)(1) of this section, unless the Secretary determines, within 30

days after the submittal of the plan to the Secretary, that the plan is inconsistent with the requirements of this Act; and

(B) to a qualified tribal government that has entered into a memorandum

of understanding with the Secretary under section 3(b) amounts allocated

to the qualified tribal government under subsection (b)(2) of this section.
2

(2) TRANSFERS TO QUALIFIED STATES.—The Secretary shall make the transfer

under paragraph (1)(A)—

(A) to the Washington State Salmon Recovery Board, in the case of

amounts allocated to Washington;

(B) to the Oregon State Watershed Enhancement Board, in the case of

amounts allocated to Oregon;

(C) to the California Salmon Recovery Fund, in the case of amounts allocated to California;

(D) to the Governor of Alaska, in the case of amounts allocated to Alaska;

and

(E) to the Office of Species Conservation, in the case of amounts allocated

to Idaho.

(d) REALLOCATION.—

(1) AMOUNTS ALLOCATED TO QUALIFIED STATES.—Amounts that are allocated

to a qualified State for a fiscal year shall be reallocated under subsection (b)(1)

among the other qualified States, if—

(A) the qualified State has not submitted a plan in accordance with section 3(a) as of the end of the fiscal year; or

(B) the amounts remain unobligated at the end of the subsequent fiscal

year.

(2) AMOUNTS ALLOCATED TO QUALIFIED TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS.—Amounts that

are allocated to a qualified tribal government for a fiscal year shall be reallocated under subsection (b)(2) among the other qualified tribal governments, if

the qualified tribal government has not entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary in accordance with section 3(b) as of the end of the

fiscal year.

SEC. 3. RECEIPT AND USE OF ASSISTANCE.

(a) QUALIFIED STATE SALMON CONSERVATION AND RESTORATION PLAN.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—To receive assistance under this Act, a qualified State shall

develop and submit to the Secretary a Salmon Conservation and Salmon Habitat Restoration Plan.

(2) CONTENTS.—Each Salmon Conservation and Salmon Restoration Plan

shall, at a minimum—

(A) be consistent with other applicable Federal laws;

(B) be consistent with the goal of salmon recovery;

(C) except as provided in subparagraph (D), give priority to use of assistance under this section for projects that—

(i) provide a direct and demonstrable benefit to salmon or their habitat;

(ii) provide the greatest benefit to salmon conservation and salmon

habitat restoration relative to the cost of the projects; and

(iii) conserve, and restore habitat, for—

(I) salmon that are listed as endangered species or threatened

species, proposed for such listing, or candidates for such listing,

under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.);

or

(II) salmon that are given special protection under the laws or

regulations of the qualified State;

(D) in the case of a plan submitted by a qualified State in which, as of

the date of the enactment of this Act, there is no area at which a salmon

species referred to in subparagraph (C)(iii)(I) spawns—

(i) give priority to use of assistance for projects referred to in subparagraph (C)(i) and (ii) that contribute to proactive programs to conserve and enhance species of salmon that intermingle with, or are otherwise related to, species referred to in subparagraph (C)(iii)(I), which

may include (among other matters)—

(I) salmon-related research, data collection, and monitoring;

(II) salmon supplementation and enhancement;

(III) salmon habitat restoration;

(IV) increasing economic opportunities for salmon fishermen; and

(V) national and international cooperative habitat programs; and

(ii) provide for revision of the plan within one year after any date on

which any salmon species that spawns in the qualified State is listed

as an endangered species or threatened species, proposed for such listing, or a candidate for such listing, under the Endangered Species Act

of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.);

(E) establish specific goals and timelines for activities funded with such

assistance;
3

(F) include measurable criteria by which such activities may be evaluated;

(G) require that activities carried out with such assistance shall—

(i) be scientifically based;

(ii) be cost effective;

(iii) not be conducted on private land except with the consent of the

owner of the land; and

(iv) contribute to the conservation and recovery of salmon;

(H) require that the qualified State maintain its aggregate expenditures

of funds from non-Federal sources for salmon habitat restoration programs

at or above the average level of such expenditures in the 2 fiscal years preceding the date of enactment of this Act; and

(I) ensure that activities funded under this Act are conducted in a manner in which, and in areas where, the State has determined that they will

have long-term benefits.

(3) SOLICITATION OF COMMENTS.—In preparing a plan under this subsection

a qualified State shall seek comments on the plan from local governments in

the qualified State.

(b) TRIBAL MOU WITH SECRETARY.— (1) IN GENERAL.—To receive assistance under this Act, a qualified tribal government shall enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary

regarding use of the assistance.

(2) CONTENTS.—Each memorandum of understanding shall, at a minimum—

(A) be consistent with other applicable Federal laws;

(B) be consistent with the goal of salmon recovery;

(C) give priority to use of assistance under this Act for activities that—

(i) provide a direct and demonstrable benefit to salmon or their habitat;

(ii) provide the greatest benefit to salmon conservation and salmon

habitat restoration relative to the cost of the projects; and

(iii) conserve, and restore habitat, for—

(I) salmon that are listed as endangered species or threatened

species, proposed for such listing, or candidates for such listing,

under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.);

or

(II) salmon that are given special protection under the ordinances or regulations of the qualified tribal government;

(D) in the case of a memorandum of understanding entered into by a

qualified tribal government for an area in which, as of the date of the enactment of this Act, there is no area at which a salmon species that is referred to in subparagraph (C)(iii)(I) spawns—

(i) give priority to use of assistance for projects referred to in subparagraph (C)(i) and (ii) that contribute to proactive programs described in subsection (a)(2)(D)(i);

(ii) include a requirement that the memorandum shall be revised

within one year after any date on which any salmon species that

spawns in the area is listed as an endangered species or threatened

species, proposed for such listing, or a candidate for such listing, under

the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.);

(E) establish specific goals and timelines for activities funded with such

assistance;

(F) include measurable criteria by which such activities may be evaluated;

(G) establish specific requirements for reporting to the Secretary by the

qualified tribal government;

(H) require that activities carried out with such assistance shall—

(i) be scientifically based;

(ii) be cost effective;

(iii) not be conducted on private land except with the consent of the

owner of the land; and

(iv) contribute to the conservation or recovery of salmon; and

(I) require that the qualified tribal government maintain its aggregate expenditures of funds from non-Federal sources for salmon habitat restoration

programs at or above the average level of such expenditures in the 2 fiscal

years preceding the date of enactment of this Act.

(c) ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Assistance under this Act may be used by a qualified State

in accordance with a plan submitted by the State under subsection (a), or by

a qualified tribal government in accordance with a memorandum of under-
4

standing entered into by the government under subsection (b), to carry out or

make grants to carry out, among other activities, the following:

(A) Watershed evaluation, assessment, and planning necessary to develop

a site-specific and clearly prioritized plan to implement watershed improvements, including for making multi-year grants.

(B) Salmon-related research, data collection, and monitoring, salmon supplementation and enhancement, and salmon habitat restoration.

(C) Maintenance and monitoring of projects completed with such assistance.

(D) Technical training and education projects, including teaching private

landowners about practical means of improving land and water management practices to contribute to the conservation and restoration of salmon

habitat.

(E) Other activities related to salmon conservation and salmon habitat

restoration.

(2) USE FOR LOCAL AND REGIONAL PROJECTS.—Funds allocated to qualified

States under this Act shall be used for local and regional projects.

(d) USE OF ASSISTANCE FOR ACTIVITIES OUTSIDE OF JURISDICTION OF RECIPIENT.—

Assistance under this section provided to a qualified State or qualified tribal government may be used for activities conducted outside the areas under its jurisdiction

if the activity will provide conservation benefits to naturally produced salmon in

streams of concern to the qualified State or qualified tribal government, respectively.

(e) COST SHARING BY QUALIFIED STATES.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—A qualified State shall match, in the aggregate, the amount

of any financial assistance provided to the qualified State for a fiscal year under

this Act, in the form of monetary contributions or in-kind contributions of services for projects carried out with such assistance. For purposes of this paragraph, monetary contributions by the State shall not be considered to include

funds received from other Federal sources.

(2) LIMITATION ON REQUIRING MATCHING FOR EACH PROJECT.—The Secretary

may not require a qualified State to provide matching funds for each project

carried out with assistance under this Act.

(3) TREATMENT OF MONETARY CONTRIBUTIONS.—For purposes of subsection

(a)(2)(H), the amount of monetary contributions by a qualified State under this

subsection shall be treated as expenditures from non-Federal sources for salmon

conservation and salmon habitat restoration programs.

(f) COORDINATION OF ACTIVITIES.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Each qualified State and each qualified tribal government

receiving assistance under this Act is encouraged to carefully coordinate salmon

conservation activities of its agencies to eliminate duplicative and overlapping

activities.

(2) CONSULTATION.—Each qualified State and qualified tribal government receiving assistance under this Act shall consult with the Secretary to ensure

there is no duplication in projects funded under this Act.

(g) LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—

(1) FEDERAL ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—Of the amount made available

under this Act each fiscal year, not more than 1 percent may be used by the

Secretary for administrative expenses incurred in carrying out this Act.

(2) STATE ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—Of the amount allocated under this Act

to a qualified State or qualified tribal government each fiscal year, not more

than 3 percent may be used by the qualified State or qualified tribal government, respectively, for administrative expenses incurred in carrying out this

Act.

SEC. 4. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.

(a) QUALIFIED STATE GOVERNMENTS.—Each qualified State seeking assistance

under this Act shall establish a citizens advisory committee or provide another similar forum for local governments and the public to participate in obtaining and using

the assistance.

(b) QUALIFIED TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS.—Each qualified tribal government receiving

assistance under this Act shall hold public meetings to receive recommendations on

the use of the assistance.

SEC. 5. CONSULTATION NOT REQUIRED.

Consultation under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.

1531 et seq.) shall not be required based solely on the provision of financial assistance under this Act.
5

SEC. 6. REPORTS.

(a) QUALIFIED STATES.—Each qualified State shall, by not later than December 31

of each year, submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

of the Senate and the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives an

annual report on the use of financial assistance received by the qualified State

under this Act. The report shall contain an evaluation of the success of this Act in

meeting the criteria listed in section 3(a)(2).

(b) SECRETARY.— (1) ANNUAL REPORT REGARDING QUALIFIED TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS.—The Secretary shall, by not later than December 31 of each year, submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives an annual report on the

use of financial assistance received by qualified tribal governments under this

Act. The report shall contain an evaluation of the success of this Act in meeting

the criteria listed in section 3(b)(2).

(2) BIANNUAL REPORT.—The Secretary shall, by not later than December 31

of the second year in which amounts are available to carry out this Act, and

of every second year thereafter, submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science,

and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Resources of the House

of Representatives a biannual report on the use of funds allocated to qualified

States under this Act. The report shall review programs funded by the States

and evaluate the success of this Act in meeting the criteria listed in section

3(a)(2).

SEC. 7. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:

(1) INDIAN TRIBE.—The term ‘‘Indian tribe’’ has the meaning given that term

in section 4(e) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act

(25 U.S.C. 450b(e)).

(2) QUALIFIED STATE.—The term ‘‘qualified State’’ means each of the States

of Alaska, Washington, Oregon, California, and Idaho.

(3) QUALIFIED TRIBAL GOVERNMENT.—The term ‘‘qualified tribal government’’ means—(A) a tribal government of an Indian tribe in Washington, Oregon, California, or Idaho that the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the

Secretary of the Interior, determines—

(i) is involved in salmon management and recovery activities under

the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); and

(ii) has the management and organizational capability to maximize

the benefits of assistance provided under this Act; and

(B) an Alaska Native village or regional or village corporation as defined

in or established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43

U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) that the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with

the Secretary of the Interior, determines—

(i) is involved in salmon conservation and management; and

(ii) has the management and organizational capability to maximize

the benefits of assistance provided under this Act.

(4) SALMON.—The term ‘‘salmon’’ means any naturally produced salmon or

naturally produced trout of the following species:

(A) Coho salmon (oncorhynchus kisutch).

(B) Chinook salmon (oncorhynchus tshawytscha).

(C) Chum salmon (oncorhynchus keta).

(D) Pink salmon (oncorhynchus gorbuscha).

(E) Sockeye salmon (oncorhynchus nerka).

(F) Steelhead trout (oncorhynchus mykiss).

(G) Sea-run cutthroat trout (oncorhynchus clarki clarki).

(H) For purposes of application of this Act in Oregon—

(i) Lahontan cutthroat trout (oncorhnychus clarki henshawi); and

(ii) Bull trout (salvelinus confluentus).

(5) SECRETARY.—The term Secretary means the Secretary of Commerce.

SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated $200,000,000 for each of the fiscal years

2001, 2002, and 2003 to carry out this Act. Funds appropriated under this section

may remain until expended.

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 2798, as introduced, is to authorize the Secretary of Commerce to provide financial assistance to the States of
6

Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and California for salmon restoration

projects in coastal waters and upland drainages.

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The salmon populations on the West Coast have been in steady

decline for a number of years, and the States are interested in

working to help rebuild salmon populations through habitat restoration and stock rebuilding programs. H.R. 2798 authorizes the

appropriations needed and gives the States and affected Indian

tribes the opportunity to make a difference through local projects

to help rebuild dwindling salmon populations.

In the Pacific Northwest there are steelhead and cutthroat trout

and five species of salmon (chinook, coho, chum, sockeye, and pink).

Pacific salmon and steelhead trout are anadromous fish whose life

cycle starts in fresh water. The fish then move into the ocean and

then return to fresh water when it is time to spawn. Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Secretary of Commerce, through

the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is responsible for

protecting endangered or threatened ocean-going fish and marine

animals.

The ESA allows listing of ‘‘distinct population segments’’ of

vertebrates as endangered or threatened; after listing, these species are eligible for special protections. NMFS bases its salmon Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU) classifications on salmon genetics

and life history traits. NMFS reviews the biological information of

species when considering an ESA listing to determine the merits

of the listing and if the species is an ESU. To date, the Northwest

region of NMFS has identified 58 ESU on the West Coast. Of the

58 ESUs, 25 salmon species are currently listed as either endangered or threatened, two are proposed to be listed, and six are candidate species.

On October 14, 1998, the Governors of Alaska, California, Oregon, and Washington sent a letter to the Clinton Administration

proposing a coast-wide Pacific salmon restoration and conservation

fund which would include $50 million for each State for each of six

years for salmon conservation and enhancement projects at local

and regional levels. The President responded to the Governors’ request by including $100 million in his Fiscal Year 2000 budget request for a Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund. In addition to

the four States, the President included the coastal Tribes of California, Oregon, and Washington. The Commerce, Justice, and State

Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2000 included $58 million for salmon habitat restoration, stock enhancement, and research. Under

this program, the four Pacific coastal States and the coastal Tribes

received funding ($18 million for Washington, $14 million for Alaska, $9 million for Oregon, $9 million for California, $6 million for

the coastal Tribes, and $2 million for the Columbia River Tribes).

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 2798 was introduced on August 5, 1999, by Congressman

Mike Thompson (D–CA). The bill was referred to the Committee on

Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans. On May 18, 2000, the

Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 2798. On July 20, 2000, the

Subcommittee met to mark up H.R. 2798. An amendment to in-
7

clude Idaho as a qualified State and to clarify that salmon conservation was also a purpose of the bill was offered by Congressman Mike Simpson (R–ID). The amendment was adopted by voice

vote. The bill was then ordered favorably reported to the Full Committee by voice vote. On July 26, 2000, the Full Resources Committee met to consider H.R. 2798. An amendment to clarify the

State matching requirement provisions of federal funds was offered

by Congressman Don Young (R–AK). An amendment to add

lahontan cutthrout trout and bull trout for purposes of application

of the bill in Oregon was offered by Congressman Peter DeFazio

(D–OR). Both amendments were adopted by unanimous consent.

The bill, as amended, was then ordered favorably reported to the

House of Representatives by unanimous consent.

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title

This section establishes the short title of the bill as the ‘‘Pacific

Salmon Recovery Act’’.

Section 2. Salmon conservation and salmon habitat restoration assistance.

Section 2 outlines how the Secretary of Commerce will dispense

the funds appropriated under this bill.

Subsection (a) specifies that the Secretary of Commerce is required to provide assistance to qualified States and qualified tribal

governments for salmon conservation and salmon habitat restoration projects.

Subsection (b) lays out the amounts to be given to qualified

States and qualified tribal governments. The States will receive

equal shares of the 85 percent of the funds appropriated to the

States. Tribal governments will receive 15 percent of the annual

appropriation and the Secretary will determine eligibility and the

specific allocations for the Tribes.

Subsection (c) states that the Secretary shall promptly transfer

funds to qualified States that have submitted Conservation and

Restoration Plans and qualified tribal governments that have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Secretary.

In addition, this subsection gives the Secretary 30 days to make

a determination on a State Plan’s consistency with the bill, but this

subsection does not provide the Secretary with veto authority over

a State’s Plan. If the Secretary finds a Plan inconsistent with the

bill, the Secretary shall notify the State and when the State

rectifies the inconsistency the Secretary shall promptly transfer the

funds to that State.

Subsection (d) outlines how the Secretary will reallocate funds in

cases where one or more States have not submitted a Conservation

and Restoration Plan or have not obligated their funds within a

specific amount of time. For those States that have not submitted

a Conservation and Restoration Plan by the end of one year or

have not obligated the federal funds after two years, the Secretary

will reallocate the funds to those other States which have submitted Conservation and Restoration Plans. The Secretary will also

reallocate a qualified tribal government’s allocation among the
8

other qualified tribal governments if it has not entered into an

MOU after one year.

The Committee does not intend for the Secretary to make a consistency finding on a State’s Salmon Conservation and Restoration

Plan at the end of the fiscal year. The Committee’s intent is for the

Secretary to acknowledge that a State has submitted its Plan and

for those that have not, reallocate the funds.

Section 3. Receipt and use of assistance

Subsection (a) states that a qualified State is required to submit

a Salmon Conservation and Salmon Habitat Restoration Plan (the

Plan) to the Secretary to receive assistance. The Plan must be consistent with other applicable federal laws, be consistent with the

goal of salmon recovery, and give priority to listed salmon through

projects that benefit salmon and its habitat. For States that at the

date of enactment do not have listed salmon that spawn in that

State, the use of the assistance also must conserve salmon and its

habitat, but can also be used for salmon-related research, data collection and monitoring, salmon supplementation and enhancement,

salmon habitat restoration, increasing economic opportunities for

salmon fishermen and national and international cooperative habitat programs. If after the date of enactment a species of salmon

does become listed in that State, the Plan must be revised within

one year to give priority to projects targeted to the newly-listed

species. A State which did not have any listed species on the date

of enactment but does have salmon which become listed at a later

point may continue to use its funds for other salmon-related research, data collection and monitoring, salmon supplementation

and enhancement, salmon habitat restoration, increasing economic

opportunities for salmon fishermen and national and international

cooperative habitat programs.

The States will be required to establish specific goals and

timelines for activities funded and include measurable criteria to

evaluate those activities. Activities should be scientifically based,

cost effective, conducted on private land only with the consent of

the landowner, and contribute to the conservation and recovery of

salmon.

The Committee understands that the States, other than Idaho,

currently have Memoranda of Understanding with the Secretary

regarding the use of Fiscal Year 2000 appropriated funds for salmon recovery. The Committee envisions the States using these

MOUs and any of the State’s current programs as the basis for its

Plan.

The Committee believes that these State projects will be beneficial to the environment and does not expect that a programmatic

environmental impact statement or an environmental impact statement for each State will be required. The Committee would encourage the Secretary upon completing the analysis under the National

Environmental Policy Act to make a determination that no environmental impact statement is required.

The Committee also encourages the Secretary to expeditiously

approve permits received under section 7 and 10 of the Endangered

Species Act for State projects that will benefit salmon and its habitat. The Committee would also like to see some coordination between NMFS and the Fish and Wildlife Service of the Department
9

of the Interior with regard to the issuance of permits to protect fish

life. It is a cumbersome process for the States to have to get duplicative permits from each agency. The agencies should coordinate so

that the activities funded under this bill can have the greatest benefit on salmon and their habitat.

The Committee’s intention with the cost effectiveness requirement is not a formal economic cost benefit analysis, but more of a

subjective weighing of costs and benefits and a generalized public

interest test.

The Committee believes it is very important that the States continue to fund projects using State funds. The Committee has therefore required the States to continue to maintain the aggregate expenditures of funds from non-federal sources for salmon habitat

restoration programs at or above the average level of such expenditures in the two fiscal years preceding the date of enactment of the

bill. It is also important for the States to use the federal funds

available under this bill on activities that are conducted in a manner in which and in areas where the activities will have long-term

benefits. In addition, States should take care to not fund projects

in areas where adjacent or nearby development projects will erode

or undo the benefits of the restoration project.

The Committee supports the funding of local and regional State

projects to conserve and restore salmon and their habitat and to

ensure local participation. Therefore, the Committee has required

qualified States to solicit comments from local governments when

developing its Salmon Conservation and Salmon Habitat Restoration Plan.

Subsection (b) states that qualified tribal governments are required to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the

Secretary to receive assistance under the bill. The MOU must be

consistent with other applicable federal laws, be consistent with

the goal of salmon recovery, and give priority to listed salmon

through projects that benefit salmon and their habitat. Qualified

tribal governments that, on the date of enactment, do not have listed salmon that spawn in the State in which the Indian tribe is located should use the assistance to conserve salmon and their habitat, but may also use the funds for salmon related research, data

collection and monitoring, salmon supplementation and enhancement, salmon habitat restoration, increasing economic opportunities for salmon fishermen and national and international cooperative habitat programs. If after the date of enactment a species of

salmon does become listed in that State, the MOU must be revised

within one year to account for the new listed species.

The qualified tribal governments should establish specific goals

and timelines for activities funded and include measurable criteria

to evaluate those activities. The MOU should contain specific requirements for reporting to the Secretary. Activities funded should

be scientifically based, cost effective, conducted on private land

only with the consent of the landowner, and contribute to the conservation and recovery of salmon.

The Committee believes that qualified tribal governments should

continue to fund projects using tribal funds. Therefore, the Committee has required the qualified tribal governments to continue to

maintain the aggregate expenditures of funds from non-federal

sources for salmon habitat restoration programs at or above the av-
10

erage level of such expenditures in the two fiscal years preceding

the date of enactment of the bill.

Subsection (c) outlines the use of funds. Qualified States and

qualified tribal governments are authorized to make grants for the

following: watershed evaluation, assessment and planning; salmon

related research; data collection; monitoring; salmon supplementation and enhancement and salmon habitat restoration; maintenance and monitoring of projects; technical training and education

projects; and other activities related to salmon conservation and

salmon habitat restoration. Funds allocated must be used for local

and regional projects.

Subsection (d) states that assistance may be used by qualified

States and qualified tribal governments for activities outside the

areas under their jurisdiction if the activities provide conservation

benefits to naturally produced salmon in streams of concern.

The Committee’s intent is to promote the recovery of naturally

produced salmon. However, projects that will benefit a natural run

of salmon that is mixed with an artificially enhanced run of salmon

would still qualify for assistance.

Subsection (e) requires States to match, in the aggregate, financial assistance provided to the qualified State for a fiscal year. The

States can match the funds in the form of monetary contributions

or in-kind contribution of services for projects carried out with such

assistance. States may not include funds received from other federal sources as matching funds. The Secretary is prohibited from

requiring States to provide matching funds on a project by project

basis. The qualified States can count the matching funds as a part

of the aggregate expenditures of funds from non-federal sources required under subsection (a)(2)(H).

Subsection (f) encourages qualified States and qualified tribal

governments to carefully coordinate salmon conservation activities

to eliminate duplicative and overlapping activities. The States and

tribal governments are also required to consult with the Secretary

to avoid the duplication of projects.

Subsection (g) limits the amount of administrative overhead. The

Secretary is limited to not more than one percent for administrative expenses. States and tribal governments are limited to three

percent for administrative expenses. States may include the cost of

holding public meetings related to projects or the development of

the Plan as administrative expenses.

Section 4. Public participation

Section 4 requires qualified States to establish a citizens advisory committee or other forum for local governments and the public

to participate in obtaining and using assistance provided under

this bill. Qualified tribal governments are required to hold public

meetings to receive recommendations on the use of assistance provided under this bill.

The Committee does not intend for a State which has process for

public participation to create a new public participation process,

but should include the existing process in its Salmon Conservation

and Salmon Habitat Restoration Plan.
11

Section 5. Consultation not required

Section 5 states that consultation under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act is not required based solely on the provision of

financial assistance under this bill.

Section 6. Reports

Section 6 requires qualified States to report annually to Congress

on the use of assistance and compliance with the bill. In addition,

the Secretary is required to report annually to Congress on qualified tribal government’s use of assistance and compliance with the

bill. The Secretary is also required to report biennially to Congress

on the use of assistance by the qualified States.

Section 7. Definitions

Section 7 defines various terms in the bill.

The term ‘‘Indian tribe’’ has the same meaning as that term in

section 4(e) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b(e)).

The term ‘‘qualified State’’ means each of the States of Alaska,

California, Idaho, Oregon and Washington.

The term ‘‘qualified tribal government’’ means a tribal government of an Indian tribe in California, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington or an Alaska Native village or regional or village corporation

as defined in or established pursuant to the Alaska Native Claims

Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) that the Secretary of Commerce in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior determines

is involved in salmon management and recovery activities under

the Endangered Species Act of 1973 and has the management and

organization capability to maximize the benefits of assistance provided under this bill.

The term ‘‘salmon’’ means any naturally produced salmon or naturally produced trout of the following species: coho salmon; chinook

salmon; chum salmon; pink salmon; sockeye salmon; steelhead

trout; sea-run cutthroat trout. In the State of Oregon, the term also

includes two additional species: lahontan cutthroat trout and bull

trout.

Section 8. Authorization of appropriations

Section 8 authorizes an appropriation of $200 million annually

for each of Fiscal Years 2001 through 2003.

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

With respect to the requirements of clause 2(l)(3) of rule XI of

the Rules of the House of Representatives, and clause 2(b)(1) of

rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee

on Resources’ oversight findings and recommendations are reflected

in the body of this report.

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States

grants Congress the authority to enact this bill.
12

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of

the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) of that rule provides

that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2) of rule

XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section

308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this bill does not

contain any new budget authority, spending authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures.

3. Government Reform Oversight Findings. Under clause 3(c)(4)

of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee has received no report of oversight findings and recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform on this

bill.

4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause

3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and

section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate for this bill from the

Director of the Congressional Budget Office:

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, August 28, 2000.

Hon. DON YOUNG, Chairman, Committee on Resources,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2798, the Pacific Salmon

Recovery Act.

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Deborah Reis.

Sincerely,

BARRY B. ANDERSON

(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).

Enclosure.

H.R. 2798—Pacific Salmon Recovery Act

Summary: Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts,

CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 2798 would cost the federal

government $600 million over the next three years. The bill would

not affect direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply. H.R. 2798 contains no private-sector or

intergovernmental mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act (UMRA).

H.R. 2798 would authorize the Secretary of Commerce to provide

grants for salmon conservation and habitat restoration projects.

For this purpose, the bill would authorize appropriations of $200

million for each of fiscal years 2001, 2002, and 2003. The funds
13

would be divided among the states of Alaska, Washington, Oregon,

California, and Idaho and the Indian tribes in those states.

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 2798 is shown in the following table. The costs

of this legislation would fall within budget function 300 (natural resources and environment).

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Spending Under Current Law:

Budget Authority 1 ........................................................................... 58 0 0 0 0 0

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................... 19 20 19 0 0 0

Proposed Changes:

Authorization Level .......................................................................... 0 200 200 200 0 0

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................... 0 200 200 200 0 0

Spending Under H.R. 2798:

Authorization Level 1 ........................................................................ 58 200 200 200 0 0

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................... 19 220 219 200 0 0

1 The 2000 level is the amount appropriated for that year for similar grants to Alaska, California, Oregon, and Washington and several Indian tribes in those states. The grants were made under a one-year authorization for salmon recovery grants contained in Public Law 106–

113, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2000.

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R.

2798 will be enacted at the beginning of fiscal year 2001 and that

the full amounts authorized will be appropriated for each year.

CBO further assumes that each of the eligible states and tribes will

submit the necessary plans and agreements in 2001. The estimate

of outlays reflects the bill’s requirement that money be transferred

promptly to each eligible state and tribe once the department has

approved its plan.

Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.

Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments: H.R.

2798 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in

UMRA. The bill would benefit Alaska, California, Idaho, Oregon,

and Washington, and tribal governments located in those states, by

authorizing the Secretary of Commerce to grant them funds for

salmon conservation and habitat restoration.

Estimated impact on the private sector: The bill contains no new

private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Deborah Reis; Impact on

State, Local and Tribal Governments: Victoria Heid Hall; Impact

on the Private Sector: Sarah Sitarek.

Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Assistant Director for

Budget Analysis.

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law.

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing law.

Æ