```

[House Report 109-641]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

109th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     109-641

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

 
         NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2006

                                _______
                                

 September 6, 2006.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Pombo, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 5861]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 5861) to amend the National Historic Preservation Act, 
and for other purposes, 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 ``National Historic Preservation Act 
Amendments of 2006''.

SEC. 2. STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER RESPONSIBILITIES.

  Section 101(b) of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 
470a(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
  ``(7) The State Historic Preservation Officer shall have no authority 
to require an applicant for Federal assistance, permit, or license to 
identify historic properties outside the undertaking's area of 
potential effects as determined by the Federal agency in accordance 
with regulations implementing section 106.
  ``(8) If the State Historic Preservation Officer or Tribal Historic 
Preservation Officer fails to respond within 30 days after an 
adequately documented finding of `no historic properties affected' or 
`no adverse effect' as provided in the regulations implementing section 
106, the Federal agency may assume that the State Historic Preservation 
Officer or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer has no objection to the 
finding.''.

SEC. 3. ADDITIONAL CRITERIA FOR CERTIFICATION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO 
                    CARRY OUT NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT.

  Section 101(c)(1) of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 
U.S.C. 470a(c)(1)) is amended--
          (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D);
          (2) by redesignating subparagraph (E) as subparagraph (F);
          (3) by inserting after subparagraph (D) the following new 
        subparagraph:
          ``(E) agrees that it shall not use any eligibility 
        determination regarding the inclusion of any property or 
        District on the National Register to initiate local regulatory 
        requirements unless the entity provides full due process 
        protection to the owner or owners of the property or District 
        through a hearing process; and''; and
          (4) in the matter below the subparagraphs, by striking 
        ``through (E)'' and inserting ``through (F)''.

SEC. 4. HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND.

  Section 108 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 
470h) is amended by striking ``2005'' and inserting ``2015''.

SEC. 5. ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION.

  (a) Membership.--Section 201 of the National Historic Preservation 
Act (16 U.S.C. 470i) is amended--
          (1) in subsection (a)(4), by striking ``four'' and inserting 
        ``seven'';
          (2) in subsection (b), by striking ``(5) and (6)'' and 
        inserting ``paragraph (6)''; and
          (3) in subsection (f), by striking ``Nine'' and inserting 
        ``Eleven''.
  (b) Financial and Administrative Services.--Section 205(f) of such 
Act (16 U.S.C. 470m(f)) is amended to read as follows:
  ``(f) Financial and administrative services (including those related 
to budgeting, accounting, financial reporting, personnel and 
procurement) shall be provided the Council by the Department of the 
Interior or, at the discretion of the Council, such other agency or 
private entity that reaches an agreement with the Council, for which 
payments shall be made from funds of the Council in such amounts as may 
be agreed upon by the Chairman of the Council and the head of the 
agency or, in the case of a private entity, the authorized 
representative of the private entity that will provide the services. 
When a Federal agency affords such services, the regulations of that 
agency for the collection of indebtedness of personnel resulting from 
erroneous payments, prescribed under section 5514(b) of title 5, United 
States Code, shall apply to the collection of erroneous payments made 
to or on behalf of a Council employee, and regulations of that agency 
for the administrative control of funds under sections 1513(d) and 1514 
of title 31, United States Code, shall apply to appropriations of the 
Council. The Council shall not be required to prescribe such 
regulations.''.
  (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 212(a) of the Act (16 
U.S.C. 470t(a)) is amended by striking ``for purposes of this title not 
to exceed $4,000,000 in each fiscal year 1997 through 2005'' and 
inserting ``such amounts as may be necessary to carry out this title''.

SEC. 6. EFFECTIVENESS OF FEDERAL GRANT AND ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS IN 
                    MEETING PURPOSES AND POLICIES OF THE NATIONAL 
                    HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT.

  The National Historic Preservation Act is amended by inserting after 
section 215 (16 U.S.C. 470v-1) the following new section:

``SEC. 216. EFFECTIVENESS OF FEDERAL GRANT AND ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS.

  ``(a) Cooperative Agreements.--The Council may enter into a 
cooperative agreement with any Federal agency that administers a grant 
or assistance program for the purpose of improving the effectiveness of 
the administration of such program in meeting the purposes and policies 
of this Act. Such cooperative agreements may include provisions that 
modify the selection criteria for a grant or assistance program to 
further the purposes of this Act or that allow the Council to 
participate in the selection of recipients, if such provisions are not 
inconsistent with the statutory authorization and purpose of the grant 
or assistance program.
  ``(b) Review of Grant and Assistance Programs.--The council may--
          ``(1) review the operation of any Federal grant or assistance 
        program to evaluate the effectiveness of such program in 
        meeting the purposes and policies of this Act;
          ``(2) make recommendations to the head of the Federal agency 
        that administers such program to further the consistency of the 
        program with the purposes and policies of this Act and to 
        improve its effectiveness in carrying out those purposes and 
        policies; and
          ``(3) make recommendations to the President and the Congress 
        regarding the effectiveness of Federal grant and assistance 
        programs in meeting the purposes and policies of this Act, 
        including recommendations with regard to appropriate funding 
        levels.''.

                          Purpose of the Bill

    The purpose of H.R. 5861 is to amend the National Historic 
Preservation Act.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    In April 2004, the Subcommittee on National Parks conducted 
a hearing on a draft bill that would have, among other things, 
limited the definition of ``historic'' under Section 106 of the 
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) to those sites and 
buildings listed on the National Register or those determined 
eligible by the Secretary of the Interior. Under the NHPA, an 
historic property is defined as sites, buildings, and other 
objects on the National Register of Historic Places or those 
``eligible for inclusion on the National Register.'' The draft 
also would have required a certified local government under the 
NHPA that utilizes a determination of eligibility for inclusion 
on the National Register to initiate local regulatory 
requirements to provide full due process to persons who object 
to a determination of eligibility on property they own.
    Following the April 2004 hearing, Subcommittee staff 
continued to work with John Nau, Chairman of the Advisory 
Council on Historic Preservation, as well as the National 
Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, the tribal 
community, the business community, the archeologists, and other 
preservation organizations to develop language to address 
issues raised in and since the 2004 hearing. One of the goals 
for the Committee has been to reduce the burden (both time and 
money) that has been unnecessarily placed on an applicant under 
the Section 106 process.
    Discussions concluded with the introduction of H.R. 5861, 
which makes the following changes to the NHPA: (1) extends 
expenditures from the Historic Preservation Fund from 2005 to 
2015 for state and tribal preservation activities; (2) 
reauthorizes and improves the administration of the Advisory 
Council on Historic Preservation; (3) requires a certified 
local government under the NHPA that utilizes a determination 
of eligibility to initiate local regulatory requirements to 
also provide full due process to property owners who object to 
a determination of eligibility on their property; and (4) 
amends Section 106 of the NHPA to require that a State Historic 
Preservation Officer/Tribal Historic Preservation Officer 
respond to a Section 106 application within 30 days of a ``no 
adverse effects'' finding and prohibits a State Historic 
Preservation Officer from requiring a federal agency and/or 
applicant to identify properties outside the identified area of 
potential effects as determined by the agency. The bill is 
designed to protect applicants from being required to fund 
surveys and other studies to identify historic properties 
beyond the area in which the undertaking may reasonably be 
expected to affect those historic properties. Section 106 of 
the NHPA requires that a federal agency take into account if a 
federal undertaking (i.e., a proposed activity involving 
federal dollars, a federal permit or license) will have an 
effect on any district, site, building, structure, or object 
that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National 
Register of Historic Place.
    The Committee recognizes the importance of tribal historic 
preservation in the national historic preservation framework 
articulated in the NHPA. Under NHPA, tribes are increasingly 
choosing to establish Tribal Historic Preservation Officer 
programs through agreements with the National Park Service. 
However, despite the increased tribal interest in participating 
actively in the national historic preservation framework by 
establishing Tribal Historic Preservation Offices, funding to 
support these important programs in Indian Country has remained 
stagnant and is being shared by a steadily increasing number of 
tribes. The Committee understands that at current funding 
levels, Tribal Historic Preservation Officers simply lack the 
resources and capacity to respond to all requests for comments 
in the Section 106 process in a timely fashion. The Committee 
urges the National Park Service to request funding for Tribal 
Historic Preservation Officers through the Historic 
Preservation Fund at a level sufficient to ensure that all 
Tribal Historic Preservation Officers have the resources 
necessary to build capacity to efficiently consider and process 
Section 106 clearance requests so that tribes have a fair 
opportunity to participate in the national historic 
preservation framework in a meaningful way.
    In terms of Section 2 of the bill, the Committee does not 
believe, nor is it its intention to (1) preempt existing 
programmatic or national programmatic agreements for an area of 
potential effects developed under Section 106 of the Act, or 
interfere in the development of future agreements; or (2) limit 
the obligations of a federal agency under the Section 106 
regulations to take into account effects on historic properties 
if historic properties are discovered or unanticipated effects 
on historic properties are found after completion of the 
Section 106 process. Finally, the Committee expects the 
National Park Service will certify that all current and future 
certified local governments under the NHPA comply with the due 
process requirement in Section 3 of this bill.

                            Committee Action

    H.R. 5861 was introduced on July 20, 2006, by Congressman 
Stevan Pearce (R-NM). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Resources. On July 26, 2006, the Full Resources Committee met 
to consider the bill. Congressman Pearce offered an amendment 
in the nature of a substitute that changed the section to be 
amend in the National Historic Preservation Act to better 
reflect the changes for the State Historic Preservation 
Officers in the Section 106 process, and modified the 
authorization for appropriations for the Advisory Council on 
Historic Preservation to improve long-term planning in Council 
programs. The amendment was adopted by unanimous consent. The 
bill as amended was then ordered favorably reported to the 
House of Representatives by unanimous consent.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Article I, section 8, clause 3 of the Constitution of the 
United States grants Congress the authority to enact this bill.

                    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. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or 
objective of this bill is to amend the National Historic 
Preservation Act, and for other purposes.
    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:

H.R. 5861--National Historic Preservation Act Amendments of 2006

    Summary: H.R. 5861 would extend the authority to make 
annual deposits of $150 million to the Historic Preservation 
Fund (HPF) through fiscal year 2015. Authority to make those 
deposits of receipts earned from oil and gas development on the 
Outer Continental Shelf into the HPF expired at the end of 
fiscal year 2005. The National Park Service (NPS) uses amounts 
appropriated from the HPF for grants to state, local, and 
tribal governments, nonprofit organizations, and other 
entities.
    The bill also would authorize the appropriation of 
necessary amounts for each year to the Advisory Council on 
Historic Preservation (ACHP). Authority for this funding--at a 
specific annual level of $4 million--also expired at the end of 
2005. Appropriations to ACHP are derived from the general fund 
of the U.S. Treasury.
    Assuming appropriation of the amounts deposited into the 
HPF each year, and assuming appropriation of the amounts 
estimated to be necessary for ACHP, CBO estimates that 
implementing H.R. 5861 would cost about $500 million over the 
2007-2011 period. Enacting this legislation would not affect 
direct spending or revenues.
    H.R. 5861 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). 
Local governments might incur some costs as a result of new 
requirements included in this bill, but those costs would 
result from their participation in a voluntary federal program.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of H.R. 5861 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 300 
(natural resources and environment).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   2006       2007       2008       2009       2010       2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Spending Under Current Law for Historic
 Preservation:
    Budget Authority \1\......................         77          0          0          0          0          0
    Estimated Outlays.........................         79         52         26         14          7          3
Proposed Changes:
    Spending of Deposits to HPF:
        Estimated Authorization Level.........          0        150        150        150        150        150
    Estimated Outlays.........................          0         37         70         95        120        150
    Advisory Council on Historic Preservation:
        Estimated Authorization Level.........          0          5          5          5          6          6
        Estimated Outlays.....................          0          5          5          5          6          6
Spending Under H.R. 5861 for Historic
 Preservation:
    Estimated Authorization Level.............         77        155        155        155        156        156
    Estimated Outlays.........................         79         94        101        114        133        159
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 2006 level is the amount appropriated for that year, including $72 million to the NPS from the HPF and
  nearly $5 million to ACHP.

    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 
5861 will be enacted by the start of fiscal year 2007 and that 
the entire $150 million that would be transferred to the HPF 
each year under the bill will be appropriated in full beginning 
in that year. Annual deposits to the HPF have been at the $150 
million level since 1980, but the amounts typically 
appropriated from the fund have been substantially lower. CBO 
expects that more than doubling the size of the historic 
preservation program (from the recent appropriation level of a 
little over $70 million a year) would initially lead to delays 
in processing grants and in raising funds for nonfederal 
matching shares. As a result, outlays would likely lag behind 
appropriations significantly over the next few years.
    The estimated authorization levels for ACHP operations are 
based on the current appropriation of nearly $5 million for 
2006, adjusted annually for anticipated inflation. Outlay 
estimates are based on historical spending patterns for these 
activities.
    Other provisions of H.R. 5861, which would amend the 
National Historic Preservation Act, would have no significant 
impact on the federal budget.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 5861 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA. Local governments might incur some costs as a 
result of new requirements included in this bill, but those 
costs would result from their participation in a voluntary 
federal program. State, local, and tribal governments would 
benefit from federal funds authorized by the bill.
    Previous CBO estimate: On March 16, 2006, CBO transmitted a 
cost estimate for S. 1378, the National Historic Preservation 
Act Amendments Act of 2006, as ordered reported by the Senate 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on March 8, 2006. The 
two versions of the legislation are very similar, and their 
estimated costs are identical.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Deborah Reis; Impact 
on state, local, and tribal governments: Marjorie Miller; 
Impact on the private sector: Paige Piper/Bach.
    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 Made by the Bill, as Reported

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

NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                                TITLE I

  Sec. 101. (a) * * *
  (b)(1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (7) The State Historic Preservation Officer shall have no 
authority to require an applicant for Federal assistance, 
permit, or license to identify historic properties outside the 
undertaking's area of potential effects as determined by the 
Federal agency in accordance with regulations implementing 
section 106.
  (8) If the State Historic Preservation Officer or Tribal 
Historic Preservation Officer fails to respond within 30 days 
after an adequately documented finding of ``no historic 
properties affected'' or ``no adverse effect'' as provided in 
the regulations implementing section 106, the Federal agency 
may assume that the State Historic Preservation Officer or 
Tribal Historic Preservation Officer has no objection to the 
finding.
  (c)(1) Any State program approved under this section shall 
provide a mechanism for the certification by the State Historic 
Preservation Officer of local governments to carry out the 
purposes of this Act and provide for the transfer in accordance 
with section 103(c), of a portion of the grants received by the 
States under this Act, to such local governments. Any local 
government shall be certified to participate under the 
provisions of this section if the applicable State Historic 
Preservation Officer, and the Secretary, certifies that the 
local government--
          (A) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (D) provides for adequate public participation in the 
        local historic preservation program, including the 
        process of recommending properties for nomination to 
        the National Register; [and]
          (E) agrees that it shall not use any eligibility 
        determination regarding the inclusion of any property 
        or District on the National Register to initiate local 
        regulatory requirements unless the entity provides full 
        due process protection to the owner or owners of the 
        property or District through a hearing process; and
          [(E)] (F) satisfactorily performs the 
        responsibilities delegated to it under this Act.
Where there is no approved State program, a local government 
may be certified by the Secretary if he determines that such 
local government meets the requirements of subparagraphs (A) 
through [(E)] (F); and in any such case the Secretary may make 
grants-in-aid to the local government for purposes of this 
section.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  Sec. 108. To carry out the provisions of this Act, there is 
hereby established the Historic Preservation Fund (hereafter 
referred to as the ``fund'') in the Treasury of the United 
States.
  There shall be covered into such fund $24,400,000 for fiscal 
year 1977, $100,000,000 for fiscal year 1978, $100,000,000 for 
fiscal year 1979, $150,000,000 for fiscal year 1980, and 
$150,000,000 for fiscal year 1981 and $150,000,000 for each of 
fiscal years 1982 through [2005] 2015, from revenues due and 
payable to the United States under the Outer Continental Shelf 
Lands Act (67 Stat. 462, 469), as amended (43 U.S.C. 1338), 
and/or under the Act of June 4, 1920 (41 Stat. 813), as amended 
(30 U.S.C. 191), notwithstanding any provision of law that such 
proceeds shall be credited to miscellaneous receipts of the 
Treasury. Such moneys shall be used only to carry out the 
purposes of this Act and shall be available for expenditure 
only when appropriated by the Congress. Any moneys not 
appropriated shall remain available in the fund until 
appropriated for said purposes: That appropriations made 
pursuant to this paragraph may be made without fiscal year 
limitation.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                                TITLE II

  Sec. 201. (a) There is established as an independent agency 
of the United States Government an Advisory Council on Historic 
Preservation which shall be composed of the following members:
          (1) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

          (4) the Secretary of Agriculture and the heads of 
        [four] seven other agencies of the United States (other 
        than the Department of the Interior) the activities of 
        which affect historic preservation, designated by the 
        President;

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (b) Each member of the Council specified in paragraphs (2) 
through (8) (other than [(5) and (6)] paragraph (6)) of 
subsection (a) may designate another officer of his department, 
agency, or organization to serve on the Council in his stead, 
except that, in the case of paragraphs (2) and (4), no such 
officer other than an Assistant Secretary or an officer having 
major department-wide or agency-wide responsibilities may be so 
designated.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (f) [Nine] Eleven members of the Council shall constitute a 
quorum.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  Sec. 205. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  [(f) Financial and administrative (including those related to 
budgeting, accounting, financial reporting, personnel and 
procurement) shall be provided the Council by the Department of 
the Interior, for which payments shall be made in advance, or 
by reimbursement, from funds of the Council in such amounts as 
may be agreed upon by the Chairman of the Council and the 
Secretary of the Interior: Provided, That the regulations of 
the Department of the Interior for the collection of 
indebtedness of personnel resulting from erroneous payments (5 
U.S.C. 46e) shall apply to the collection of erroneous payments 
made to or on behalf of a Council employee, and regulations of 
said Secretary for the administrative control of funds (31 
U.S.C. 665(g)) shall apply to appropriations of the Council: 
And provided further, That the Council shall not be required to 
prescribe such regulations.]
  (f) Financial and administrative services (including those 
related to budgeting, accounting, financial reporting, 
personnel and procurement) shall be provided the Council by the 
Department of the Interior or, at the discretion of the 
Council, such other agency or private entity that reaches an 
agreement with the Council, for which payments shall be made 
from funds of the Council in such amounts as may be agreed upon 
by the Chairman of the Council and the head of the agency or, 
in the case of a private entity, the authorized representative 
of the private entity that will provide the services. When a 
Federal agency affords such services, the regulations of that 
agency for the collection of indebtedness of personnel 
resulting from erroneous payments, prescribed under section 
5514(b) of title 5, United States Code, shall apply to the 
collection of erroneous payments made to or on behalf of a 
Council employee, and regulations of that agency for the 
administrative control of funds under sections 1513(d) and 1514 
of title 31, United States Code, shall apply to appropriations 
of the Council. The Council shall not be required to prescribe 
such regulations.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  Sec. 212. (a) The Council shall submit its budget annually as 
a related agency of the Department of the Interior. There are 
authorized to be appropriated [for the purposes of this title 
not to exceed $4,000,000 in each fiscal year 1997 through 2005] 
such amounts as may be necessary to carry out this title.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 216. EFFECTIVENESS OF FEDERAL GRANT AND ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS

  (a) Cooperative Agreements.--The Council may enter into a 
cooperative agreement with any Federal agency that administers 
a grant or assistance program for the purpose of improving the 
effectiveness of the administration of such program in meeting 
the purposes and policies of this Act. Such cooperative 
agreements may include provisions that modify the selection 
criteria for a grant or assistance program to further the 
purposes of this Act or that allow the Council to participate 
in the selection of recipients, if such provisions are not 
inconsistent with the statutory authorization and purpose of 
the grant or assistance program.
  (b) Review of Grant and Assistance Programs.--The council 
may--
          (1) review the operation of any Federal grant or 
        assistance program to evaluate the effectiveness of 
        such program in meeting the purposes and policies of 
        this Act;
          (2) make recommendations to the head of the Federal 
        agency that administers such program to further the 
        consistency of the program with the purposes and 
        policies of this Act and to improve its effectiveness 
        in carrying out those purposes and policies; and
          (3) make recommendations to the President and the 
        Congress regarding the effectiveness of Federal grant 
        and assistance programs in meeting the purposes and 
        policies of this Act, including recommendations with 
        regard to appropriate funding levels.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                                  

```