★ 80–696

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ! 2d Session 107–564

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES 

APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2003

JULY 11, 2002.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. SKEEN, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

MINORITY VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 5093]

The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report in 

explanation of the accompanying bill making appropriations for the 

Department of the Interior and Related Agencies for the fiscal year 

ending September 30, 2003. The bill provides regular annual appropriations for the Department of the Interior (except the Bureau 

of Reclamation) and for other related agencies, including the Forest 

Service, the Department of Energy, the Indian Health Service, the 

Smithsonian Institution, and the National Foundation on the Arts 

and the Humanities.

CONTENTS 

Page number 

Bill Report 

Department of the Interior: 

Bureau of Land Management ............................................................ 2 10

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service ........................................................... 12 25

National Park Service ......................................................................... 23 40

U.S. Geological Survey ....................................................................... 32 59

Minerals Management Service .......................................................... 34 66

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement ................. 37 68

Bureau of Indian Affairs .................................................................... 39 73

Departmental Offices .......................................................................... 47 81

General Provisions .............................................................................. 54 92

Related Agencies: 

2

Page number 

Bill Report 

Forest Service, USDA ......................................................................... 75 94

Department of Energy ........................................................................ 92 119

Fossil Energy ....................................................................................... 92 119

Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves ......................................... 94 125

Energy Conservation .......................................................................... 95 128

Economic Regulation ........................................................................... 95 134

Strategic Petroleum Reserve .............................................................. 96 135

Energy Information Administration .................................................. 96 136

Indian Health Service, DHHS ................................................................... 99 137

Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation ........................................... 107 143

Institute of American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development ................................................................................................ 108 144

Smithsonian Institution ............................................................................. 108 144

National Gallery of Art .............................................................................. 111 148

John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts ................................... 113 151

Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars ................................ 113 152

National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities ........................... 114 152

Commission of Fine Arts ........................................................................... 116 157

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation .............................................. 117 158

National Capital Planning Commission ................................................... 117 158

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ........................................... 117 159

Presidio Trust ............................................................................................. 118 159

Title III— General Provisions ................................................................... 118 160

COMPARISON WITH BUDGET RESOLUTION

Section 308(a)(1)(A) of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, requires that the report accompanying a bill providing new budget 

authority contain a Statement detailing how the authority compares with the reports submitted under section 302 of the Act for 

the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget for 

the fiscal year. This information follows:

[In millions of dollars] 

Sec. 302(b) This bill— 

Discretionary Mandatory Discretionary Mandatory 

Budget authority ............................................................ $19,730 63 $19,730 63 

Outlays ........................................................................... 18,969 64 19,260 64 

The allocation for fiscal year 2003 includes $1,440,000,000 in discretionary budget authority for conservation spending pursuant to 

Section 251(c) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended, and $1,052,000,000 in outlays. There 

is also $400,000,000 in outlays attributable to additional 2002 

emergency firefighting funds included in the outlay total. 

SUMMARY OF THE BILL

The Committee has conducted hearings on the programs and 

projects provided for in the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations bill for 2003. The hearings are contained in 9 published 

volumes totaling nearly 10,000 pages. 

During the course of the hearings, testimony was taken at 14 

hearings on 11 days, not only from agencies which come under the 

jurisdiction of the Interior Subcommittee, but also from Members 

3

of Congress, and, in written form, from State and local government 

officials, and private citizens. 

The bill that is recommended for fiscal year 2003 has been developed after careful consideration of all the facts and details available to the Committee.

BUDGET AUTHORITY RECOMMENDED IN BILL BY TITLE 

Activity Budget estimates, 

fiscal year 2003 

Committee bill, fiscal 

year 2003 

Committee bill compared with budget 

estimates 

Title I, Department of the Interior: New Budget (obligational) 

authority ............................................................................... $9,450,753,000 $9,969,175,000 +$518,422,000 

Title II, related agencies: New Budget (obligational) authority 9,488,163,000 10,444,950,000 +956,787,000

Grand total, New Budget (obligational) authority ...... 18,938,916,000 20,414,125,000 +1,475,209,000 

TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

AND RELATED AGENCIES

In addition to the amounts in the accompanying bill, which are 

reflected in the table above, permanent legislation authorizes the 

continuation of certain government activities without consideration 

by the Congress during the annual appropriations process. 

Details of these activities are listed in tables at the end of this 

report. In fiscal year 2001, these activities are estimated to total 

$3,384,125,000. The estimate for fiscal year 2002 is $3,584,842,000. 

The following table reflects the total budget (obligational) authority contained both in this bill and in permanent appropriations for 

fiscal years 2002 and 2003.

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES TOTAL BUDGET AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL 

YEARS 2002–2003 

Item Fiscal year 2002 Fiscal year 2003 Change 

Interior and related agencies appropriations bill .................... $19,167,770,000 $20,414,125,000 +$1,246,355,000 

Permanent appropriations, Federal funds ................................ 2,588,751,000 2,548,278,000 ¥40,473,000 

Permanent appropriations, trust funds .................................... 624,897,000 595,918,000 ¥28,979,000

Total budget authority ................................................. 22,381,418,000 23,558,321,000 +1,176,903,000 

REVENUE GENERATED BY AGENCIES IN BILL

The following tabulation indicates total new obligational authority to date for fiscal years 2001 and 2002, and the amount recommended in the bill for fiscal year 2003. It compares receipts generated by activities in this bill on an actual basis for fiscal year 

2001 and on an estimated basis for fiscal years 2002 and 2003. The 

programs in this bill are estimated to generate $6.1 billion in revenues for the Federal Government in fiscal year 2003. Therefore, the 

expenditures in this bill will contribute to economic stability rather 

than inflation.

Item 

Fiscal year—

2001 2002 2003 

New obligational authority ........................................................ $18,892,320,000 $19,167,770,000 $20,414,125,000 

Receipts: 

Department of the Interior ............................................... 10,865,661,000 6,609,623,000 5,719,689,000 

4

Item 

Fiscal year—

2001 2002 2003 

Forest Service ................................................................... 424,019,000 420,972,000 422,036,000 

Naval Petroleum Reserves ............................................... 7,836,000 7,187,000 7,233,000

Total receipts ............................................................... 11,297,516,000 7,037,782,000 6,148,958,000 

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 2003, is defined 

by the Committee as follows: 

As provided for by section 256(l)(2) of Public Law 99–177, as 

amended, and for the purpose of a Presidential Order issued pursuant to section 254 of said Act, the term ‘‘program, project, and activity’’ for items under the jurisdiction of the Appropriations Subcommittees on the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies of the House of Representatives and the Senate is defined as 

(1) any item specifically identified in tables or written material set 

forth in the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, or 

accompanying committee reports or the conference report and accompanying joint explanatory Statement of the managers of the 

committee of conference; (2) any Government-owned or Government-operated facility; and (3) management units, such as National 

parks, National forests, fish hatcheries, wildlife refuges, research 

units, regional, State and other administrative units and the like, 

for which funds are provided in fiscal year 2003. 

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 $5.2 billion for Indian programs in fiscal year 

2003. This is an increase of $99 million above the budget request 

and an increase of $230 million above the amount appropriated for 

fiscal year 2002. Spending for Indian services by the Federal Government in total is included in the following table.

[In thousands of dollars] 

Budget Authority Fiscal year 2001 

actual 

Fiscal year 2002, 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2003, 

budget estimate 

Department of Agriculture .......................................................................... $611,737 $671,438 $711,397 

Department of Commerce ........................................................................... 41,884 17,534 12,534 

Department of Defense ............................................................................... 18,000 18,000 0 

Department of Justice ................................................................................. 202,960 237,122 201,264 

Department of Education ............................................................................ 1,852,991 1,974,208 2,064,089 

Department of HHS ..................................................................................... 3,125,858 3,341,815 3,421,043 

Department of HUD ..................................................................................... 731,557 731,557 729,500 

Department of Veterans Affairs .................................................................. 538 551 565 

Department of the Interior .......................................................................... 2,617,113 2,664,262 2,770,316 

Department of Labor ................................................................................... 71,919 73,919 70,014 

Department of Transportation .................................................................... 265,481 281,411 202,029 

5

[In thousands of dollars]

Budget Authority Fiscal year 2001 

actual 

Fiscal year 2002, 

enacted 

Fiscal year 2003, 

budget estimate 

Environmental Protection Agency ............................................................... 216,109 228,698 232,276 

Small Business Administration .................................................................. 1,250 0 1,000 

Smithsonian Institution .............................................................................. 37,305 67,896 53,517 

Army Corps of Engineers ............................................................................ 23,777 26,007 23,631 

Department of the Treasury ........................................................................ 5,000 5,000 5,000 

Other Independent Agencies ....................................................................... 76,785 80,059 78,846

Total ............................................................................................... 9,900,264 10,419,477 10,577,021 

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. 

ACCRUAL FUNDING OF RETIREMENT COSTS AND POST-RETIREMENT

HEALTH BENEFITS

The President’s Budget included a legislative proposal under the 

jurisdiction of the House Committee on Government Reform to 

charge to individual agencies, starting in fiscal year 2003, the fully 

accrued costs related to retirement benefits of Civil Service Retirement System employees and retiree health benefits for all civilian 

employees. The Budget also requested an additional dollar amount 

in each affected discretionary account to cover these accrued costs. 

Without passing judgment on the merits of this legislative proposal, the Committee has reduced the dollar amounts of the President’s request shown in the ‘‘Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority’’ and other tables in this report to exclude the accrual 

funding proposal. The disposition by Congress of the legislative 

proposal is unclear at this time. Should the proposal be passed by 

Congress and enacted, the Committee will make appropriate adjustments to the President’s request to include accrual amounts. 

The Committee further notes that administration proposals requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. Should such 

a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment formally modifying the 

President’s appropriation request for discretionary funding is then 

transmitted to the Congress. 

The Committee is concerned that this practice, which has always 

worked effectively for both Congress and past administrations, was 

not followed for the accrual funding proposal. In this case, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) decided to include accrual 

6

amounts in the original discretionary appropriations language request. These amounts are based on legislation that has yet to be 

considered and approved by the appropriate committees of Congress. This led to numerous misunderstandings both inside and 

outside of Congress of what was the ‘‘true’’ President’s budget request. The Committee believes that, in the future, OMB should follow long-established procedures with respect to discretionary 

spending proposals that require legislative action. 

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. 

CONSERVATION INITIATIVE

The Committee has continued the conservation initiative started 

in title VIII of the fiscal year 2001 Interior and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act. The table below includes funding information 

for that initiative. Continuing its commitment to this important 

initiative, the Committee has recommended a total of 

$1,440,000,000 for fiscal year 2003. This amount is equal to the 

maximum amount available for appropriation through the Interior 

and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2003. The 

funding under the conservation initiative is summarized in the 

table below.

Subcategory/appropriation account 2002 Enacted 2003 Request 2003 committee 

recommendation 

Federal Land Acquisition: 

BLM Federal Land Acquisition ..................................................... 49,920 3 44,686 49,286 

FWS Federal Land Acquisition ..................................................... 99,135 3 70,384 82,250 

NPS Federal Land Acquisition ..................................................... 130,117 3 86,057 99,099 

Dept. Mgmt, BIA water settlement .............................................. .......................... 3 3,000 0 

FS Federal Land Acquisition ........................................................ 149,742 3 130,510 146,336

Subtotal, Federal Land Acquisition ......................................... 428,914 3 334,637 376,971 

NPS Stateside LWCF Grants (and Administration) ...................... 144,000 3

⁄4 200,000 154,000

Subtotal, Federal and State LWCF .......................................... 572,914 3 534,637 530,971

State and Other Conservation Programs: 

State Wildlife Grants ................................................................... 1 60,000 2

⁄3 60,000 5 100,000 

FWS Incentive Grant Programs .................................................... 40,000 3 50,000 5 40,000 

FWS Stewardship Grants Program ............................................... 10,000 3 10,000 5 10,000 

FWS Coop. Endangered Species Conserv. Fund .......................... 96,235 3 91,000 5 121,400 

FWS North American Wetlands Conserv. Fund ............................ 43,500 3 43,560 43,560 

FWS Migratory Bird Fund ............................................................. (3,000) (1,000) 5,000 

FWS Multinational Species Fund ................................................. (4,000) (4,000) 4,800 

USGS State Planning Partnerships .............................................. 25,000 13,578 25,000 

Cooperative Conservation Initiative (BLM, FWS, NPS) ................ .......................... 50,000 26,000 

7

Subcategory/appropriation account 2002 Enacted 2003 Request 2003 committee 

recommendation 

FS, Forest Legacy ......................................................................... 65,000 3 69,797 5 60,000 

FS, Forest Stewardship ................................................................ (33,171) 3 49,526 36,898

Subtotal, State & other conservation programs ..................... 339,735 437,461 472,658

Urban and Historic Preservation Programs: 

NPS Historic Preservation Fund ................................................... 74,500 67,000 76,500 

NPS Urban Parks & Recreation Recovery Grants ........................ 30,000 300 30,000 

FS Urban and Community Forestry .............................................. 36,000 36,235 36,235 

Youth Conservation Corps (BLM, FWS, NPS, FS) ......................... 7,000 7,000 7,000 

Subtotal, Urban & Historic ...................................................... 147,500 110,535 149,735

Payments in Lieu of Taxes—BLM ........................................................ 50,000 15,000 7 70,000 

National Wildlife Refuge Fund sharing—FWS ..................................... .......................... .......................... 8 5,000

Federal Infrastructure Improvement Programs ..................................... 184,851 220,102 211,636

Total, Conservation Spending Category .................................. 1,295,000 1,317,735 1,440,000 

(1) There was a $25m rescission of these funds in FY 02, amount shown is after rescission; (2) $5,000,000 for tribal grants included in State Wildlife grants category; (3) requested from LWCF in 2003; (4) includes $50 million for Coop. Conservation Initiative; (5) includes funding from Land and Water Conservation Fund; (6) includes $30,000,000 for Saving America’s Treasures; (7) an additional $160 million for PILT 

is not in CSC; (8) an additional $14,414,000 for refuge fund is not in CSC. 

CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIPS

The Committee has not agreed to start a new cooperative conservation initiative, as proposed by the Department of the Interior, 

but wholeheartedly supports the concept of cooperative efforts to 

address critical habitat restoration and protection needs. The Committee believes that the goal of conservation through partnerships 

should be accomplished using existing cooperative programs. The 

current challenge cost share programs in each of the land management agencies are excellent examples of partnership efforts that leverage Federal funds. The Committee strongly believes agencies 

should view partnerships as an approach to doing business rather 

than an opportunity to create new programs or new administrative 

entities to accomplish cooperative conservation. The total amount 

added to the budget request to address cooperative partnerships 

through existing programs at the Department of the Interior is 

$41,000,000 as detailed below. In addition, the Committee recommends continuing the landowner incentive program and the private stewardship grant program, which were started in fiscal year 

2002 under the Fish and Wildlife Service. The $50,000,000 for 

those two new programs is continued for fiscal year 2003. 

The Committee has recommended increases in the challenge cost 

share programs in the Department of the Interior. In the Bureau 

of Land Management, an increase of $10,000,000 is recommended, 

which more than doubles the funding to a total of $19,000,000. 

Under the Committee’s recommendation for fiscal year 2003, funding for the National Park Service challenge cost share program will 

be increased by $7,000,000, an increase of 100 percent, for a total 

availability of $14,000,000. The amount not set-aside for Lewis and 

Clark projects will actually increase by 350 percent—from 

$2,000,000 to $9,000,000. In the Fish and Wildlife Service about 

$3,500,000 in refuge operations is currently used for the challenge 

cost share program and the Committee has recommended adding 

$3,000,000 for that program. 

8

In the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Committee has recommended adding funding to several existing programs that have 

a demonstrated ability to leverage Federal funds. The Committee 

has also placed an emphasis on addressing invasive species control 

through cost-shared projects. In addition to the increase for the refuge challenge cost share program, the Committee has recommended increases of $2,000,000 for on-refuge invasive species 

control projects using friends groups and volunteers, $1,000,000 for 

invasive species control projects under the Partners for Fish and 

Wildlife program, $1,000,000 for spartina control in Willapa Bay, 

Washington with the expectation that the State and other partners 

will provide additional funds to address this problem, $1,000,000 

for coastal programs, $1,000,000 for joint venture programs in migratory bird management, $2,000,000 for fish passage projects, and 

$1,000,000 for aquatic nuisance control. The Committee has also 

recommended an increase of $12,000,000 for habitat conservation 

plan land acquisition under the cooperative endangered species 

conservation fund. 

The Committee also notes that the North American Wetlands 

Conservation program in the Fish and Wildlife Service is an excellent example of the power of conservation partnerships. Likewise, 

the Committee continues to support funding for the National Fish 

and Wildlife Foundation in the Bureau of Land Management, the 

Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park Service, and the Forest Service. The Committee suggests that the Natural Resource 

Damage Assessment program should be examined for enhanced 

restoration partnership potential. 

The Committee notes that the Forest Service had an active challenge cost share program using available funds; as recently as fiscal year 2000 the Forest Service set aside $35,057,000 and anticipated $56,517,000 in cooperator contributions. This funding produced tremendous on-the ground accomplishments providing substantial conservation, leverage of non-Federal funds, and successful 

cooperation with many local groups. The Committee has additional 

instructions for the Forest Service challenge cost share program 

under the National forest system heading. The Committee expects 

the Forest Service to reestablish this program. 

The Committee strongly encourages the Department of the Interior and the Forest Service to use proven, existing programs, and 

use the existing criteria for those programs, to meet the goals of 

cooperative conservation. In the fiscal year 2004 budget, the Committee encourages the Department of the Interior and the Forest 

Service to expand programs with proven track records for 

leveraging Federal funds to deliver on the ground habitat restoration and protection. The fiscal year 2004 budget justification should 

include a crosscut table of partnership programs for each land 

management agency, including information on Federal funding and 

cost sharing by program. The Department of the Interior and the 

Forest Service should also report to the Committee no later than 

December 31, 2002, on the current status of their conservation 

partnership programs. 

9

ENERGY RESEARCH—RESPONDING TO THE NATIONAL ENERGY

POLICY

Last year the Committee wholeheartedly welcomed the Administration’s National Energy Policy. The Committee was disappointed 

that the budget request for fiscal year 2003 for energy programs 

did not more fully embrace research in many critical areas. The 

Committee agrees that the Department of Energy must do a better 

job of measuring potential program success and of refocusing or 

discontinuing programs that are not yielding results. However, the 

Committee also believes that new programs must continue to be explored and promising research need to be expanded if we are to 

achieve the goals of energy independence, dramatically lower energy consumption, and significantly reduced emissions of harmful 

pollutants from energy production and use. 

The Committee’s recommendations are responsive to those goals 

and to the underlying National Energy Policy. The recommendations include $1.9 billion for energy programs in the Interior bill, 

an increase of $126 million above last year and $175 million above 

the budget request. The recommendations reflect a balanced approach to handling both the supply and demand sides of the energy 

issue. Likewise, there is a balance between research on technologies for traditional and alternative fuels. We need both traditional fuels and alternative fuels and we need to find ways to use 

all fuels and technologies more efficiently and more cleanly. 

The Committee continues to support the President’s clean coal 

power initiative and has recommended large increases in funding 

for the weatherization assistance program and for State energy 

grants. The Committee also has recommended restoring most of the 

reductions proposed in the budget request for energy conservation 

research and for research to improve fossil energy technologies. We 

need to do all these things if we are to have a balanced and rational national energy strategy. 

The Committee agrees with the Administration that some programs have not been as productive as anticipated. In the past the 

Committee has recommended the elimination of dozens of such programs in the energy area and will continue to do so in the future. 

The nature of research is such that failures must be acknowledged 

and not perpetuated in order to make room for new ideas and unanticipated breakthroughs in technologies.

Much of the funding in the Interior bill is intended to provide 

seed money for new ideas. Once those ideas result in new technology and are adopted by industry, the Federal role is completed. 

Too often in the past, the government has not terminated programs 

that have not yielded results or has continued to participate in programs once they were market ready. Those mistakes should not be 

repeated. Most energy innovations come about through the actions 

of industry and small entrepreneurs and without Federal assistance. It is not the job of the Federal government to pick ‘‘winners 

and losers’’ in the energy area. The marketplace and the consumer 

are the ultimate decision makers. The Federal role is an important 

one but it should not extend beyond basic and applied research. 

The Committee, in its recommendations, has attempted to maintain diversity of energy research and not cross the line into marketing. 

10

RECREATION ON THE PUBLIC LANDS

Public participation in recreation programs funded in this bill is 

an important and growing aspect of the land management agencies 

under the jurisdiction of this Committee. These agencies are responsible for the National Parks managed by the National Park 

Service, the National Wildlife Refuge System managed by the 

United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Nation’s public lands 

managed by the Bureau of Land Management, and our National 

Forests and Grasslands managed by the Forest Service. The Forest 

Service manages 192 million acres, has over 220 million visits per 

year, and attracts 84 thousand volunteers. By contrast the National Park Service manages 84 million acres, has about 286 million visitors, and attracts 120 thousand volunteers. The U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service manages 95 million acres, has 41 million visitors annually and attracts 35 thousand volunteers. The Bureau of 

Land Management has the largest land base of the land management agencies with 262 million acres. BLM has about 52 million 

visitors annually and attracts 17 thousand volunteers. The Committee continues to place a high priority on maintaining these 

recreation programs, ensuring that the American public has safe 

and uplifting experiences on the Nation’s public lands. The Committee is grateful to all the volunteers who are helping to make the 

public lands better places for the visiting public and for generations 

to come. 

LAW ENFORCEMENT IN SOUTHERN ARIZONA

The Committee is concerned with the limited amount of Department of the Interior and Forest Service law enforcement resources 

in southern Arizona. More illegal immigration is occurring in this 

region than any other area of the country. These illegal immigrants 

and drug smuggling activities damage the natural and cultural resources, reduce visitor safety, and erode public confidence and enjoyment of these lands. Further, warming and cooking fires built 

and abandoned by illegal immigrants have caused wildfires that 

have destroyed over 40,000 acres of valuable wildlife habitat and 

are extremely dangerous to the surrounding communities. Increased law enforcement resources are needed in southern Arizona, 

and the Committee directs the Secretary of the Interior and the 

Chief of the Forest Service to assign additional federal law enforcement officers to southern Arizona. 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

The Bureau of Land Management is responsible for the multiple 

use management, protection, and development of a full range of 

natural resources, including minerals, timber, rangeland, fish and 

wildlife habitat, and wilderness on about 262 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 the grazing of approximately 4.3 million head 

11

of livestock on some 161 million acres of public land ranges, and 

manages over 48,000 wild horses and burros, some 262 million 

acres of wildlife habitat, and over 117,000 miles of fisheries habitat. Grazing receipts are estimated to be about $14 million in fiscal 

year 2003, compared to an estimated $14 million in fiscal year 

2002 and actual receipts of $14 million in fiscal year 2001. The Bureau also administers about 49 million acres of commercial 

forestlands through the ‘‘Management of Lands and Resources’’ and ‘‘Oregon and California grant lands’’ appropriations. Timber re- ceipts (including salvage) are estimated to be $26.7 million in fiscal 

year 2003 compared to estimated receipts of $18.0 million in fiscal 

year 2002 and actual receipts of $12.5 million in fiscal year 2001. 

The Bureau has an active program of soil and watershed management on 175 million acres in the lower 48 States and 92 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, 2002 .............................................................. $775,632,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 812,990,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 826,932,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +51,300,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +13,942,000

The Committee recommends $826,932,000 for management of 

lands and resources an increase of $13,942,000 above the budget 

request and $51,300,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

12


Insert offset folio 01 HR564.001
13


Insert offset folio 02 HR564.002
14


Insert offset folio 03 HR564.003
15

Land resources.—The Committee recommends $182,207,000 for 

land resources, $4,650,000 above the budget request and 

$2,760,000 above the 2002 level including increases above the 2002 

level $2,060,000 for fixed costs, $2,150,000 for NLCS reallocation, 

$1,000,000 for the Bureau’s new science initiative, $1,500,000 for 

range monitoring, and $600,000 for NLCS, and decreases of 

$794,000 for travel reductions, $500,000 for the Idaho Department 

of Agriculture weed program, $1,000,000 for the National Center of 

Weed Management at Montana State University, $400,000 for the 

Headwater Reserve, and $1,856,000 for challenge cost share reallocation. In addition, the San Pedro Partnership is maintained at 

the 2002 level of $1,000,000. 

The Committee is concerned that the Bureau’s range conservationist staff levels have decreased dramatically, reducing capability 

to provide rangeland health monitoring and service to grazing permit holders. The Committee recommends that the $1,500,000 be 

used to increase the Bureau’s capability to place more personnel in 

the field to address more effectively rangeland health issues and 

increase service to grazing permittees. 

Last year the Committee required the Secretary of Agriculture 

and the Secretary of the Interior to charter an interagency group 

to address rangeland assessment and monitoring issues at both the 

local and national levels. Also, they are to develop a coordinated 

plan and budget to carry out standardized soil surveys and ecological classification on all the Nation’s rangelands. The Committee expects the Secretaries to provide a detailed progress report by February 1, 2003, on how they have responded to that direction, and 

include in the fiscal year 2004 budget justifications projected budget and personnel needs to initiate coordinated inventory, assessment and monitoring of the Nation’s rangelands on a continuing 

basis. 

Wildlife and fisheries.—The Committee recommends $34,514,000 

for wildlife and fisheries, $760,000 above the budget request and 

$2,913,000 below the 2002 enacted level including increases above 

the 2002 level of $395,000 for fixed costs and $260,000 for NLCS 

reallocation, $500,000 under the fisheries subactivity for biological 

support of use authorizations, and decreases of $3,917,000 for challenge cost share reallocation, and $152,000 for travel. 

Threatened and endangered species.—The Committee recommends $21,760,000 for threatened and endangered species, 

$472,000 above the budget request and $142,000 above the 2002 

enacted level including increases above the 2002 level of $257,000 

for fixed costs, $385,000 for NLCS reallocation and $1,000,000 for 

planning, and a decrease of $1,500,000 for challenge cost share reallocation. 

Recreation management.—The Committee recommends 

$59,383,000 for recreation management, $3,313,000 below the 

budget request and $4,906,000 below the 2002 enacted level included increases above the 2002 level of $792,000 for fixed costs, 

$900,000 NLCS, $302,000 under recreation management for monitoring, $500,000 recreation access, and decreases of $4,115,000 

NLCS reallocation, $285,000 for travel, $300,000 for Utah mapping, $1,700,000 for challenge cost share reallocation, and 

$1,000,000 for undaunted stewardship. 

16

Recreation on public lands continues to rapidly increase with approximately 220 million visitors to National Forests and Grasslands and 65 million visitors to lands managed by the Bureau of 

Land Management. The Committee is concerned that the public 

have adequate access to these lands. Over a decade ago, a General 

Accounting Office (GAO) report found that over 50.4 million acres 

of public lands administered by the Forest Service and Bureau of 

Land Management had inadequate access. The Committee is unaware of whether access to Federal public lands has improved or 

declined since the 1992 GAO report. Therefore, the Committee directs that, by January 31, 2003, the Forest Service and Bureau of 

Land Management submit a report(s) that include the number of 

acres by State under their jurisdiction that currently have inadequate public access, by State what steps have been taken or are 

currently underway to improve access, what actions are needed to 

improve access, and the extent to which a central repository of information exists for those lands with access problems. The Committee recommends $802,000 to improve management of 

motorized and non-motorized recreation access to public lands. This 

additional funding is provided to increase the Bureau’s capability 

to better meet the growing public demand for recreational opportunities on public lands in balance with the need to monitor and protect public safety and resource values. 

Energy and minerals.—The Committee recommends 

$109,069,000 for energy and minerals including Alaska minerals, 

$2,000,000 above the budget request and $9,536,000 above the 

2002 enacted level including increase above the 2002 level of 

$1,456,000 for fixed costs, $1,000,000 for the National Petroleum 

Reserve Alaska, $3,000,000 for re-permitting the Trans-Alaska 

pipeline, $1,500,000 for inspection and enforcement, $1,000,000 for 

Energy Policy Act assessments, $1,496,000 for applications to drill, 

principally in the Powder River Basin in Wyoming and Montana, 

$900,000 for Indian trust, $700,000 for geothermal activities, 

$500,000 for coal leasing, $450,000 mineral materials, and decreases of $341,000 for travel, $350,000 for geothermal reallocation, 

and $1,775,000 for the Alaska mineral assessment. Within the 

funds provided for oil and gas up to $500,000 is available to finish 

the Powder River Basin EISs. No funds have been included by the 

Committee in the fiscal year 2003 bill for activity related to potential energy development within the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. 

Realty and ownership management.—The Committee recommends $85,350,000 for realty and ownership management, 

$100,000 above the budget request and $653,000 above the 2002 

enacted level including increases above the 2002 level of $1,169,000 

for fixed costs, $100,000 for NLCS reallocation, $1,600,000 for 

rights-of-way and $400,000 for renewable energy, and decreases of 

$1,500,000 for the Alaska lands database, $300,000 for the Utah 

survey, $350,000 for the Montana survey, and $466,000 for travel. 

Resource protection and maintenance.—The Committee recommends $78,777,000 for resource protection and maintenance, 

$2,550,000 above the budget request and $17,086,000 above the 

2002 enacted level including increases above the 2002 of $704,000 

for fixed costs, $14,000,000 for land management plans, $250,000 

for the west Mojave plan, $500,000 for NLCS, $400,000 for California desert rangers, $500,000 for Imperial Sand Dunes law enVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
17

forcement, and $1,000,000 for mitigation of environmental degradation caused by illegal immigrants in southeastern Arizona, and a 

decrease of $268,000 for travel. 

The Committee previously acknowledged the concern that has 

been raised over the condition of the Bureau’s land use plans, and is providing an additional $14,000,000 as requested for this planning effort in 2003. 

The Committee is aware that the BLM is completing the regional 

plan amendments to the California Desert Conservation Plan required by a lawsuit settlement involving the Endangered Species 

Act. These plans, to be completed in fiscal year 2003, will require 

increased funding to implement and to avoid further litigation risk. 

Therefore, the Committee strongly advises the Department and the 

Bureau to fund this plan in the 2004 budget. 

Transportation and facilities maintenance.—The Committee recommends $84,278,000 for transportation and facilities maintenance, $6,320,000 above the budget request and $6,411,000 above 

the 2002 enacted level including increases above the 2002 level of 

$502,000 for fixed costs, $1,220,000 for NLCS reallocation, 

$100,000 for the Pacific Crest Trail, $1,000,000 for California 

desert communications, and $4,000,000 under infrastructure improvement for fish passage improvements (culverts) on Bureau 

lands, and a decrease of $411,000 for travel. 

The Committee recognizes the significance of the national scenic 

and historic trails administered by the Bureau, and has provided 

an additional $100,000 for maintenance of sections of the Pacific 

Crest National Scenic Trail in California and Oregon. 

Land and resource information systems.—The Committee recommends $19,744,000 for land resource information systems, 

$403,000 above the budget request and $12,000 below the 2002 enacted level including an increase above the 2002 level of $121,000 

for fixed costs and a decrease of $133,000 for travel. 

Mining law administration.—The Committee recommends 

$32,696,000 for mining law administration. This activity is supported by offsetting fees equal to the amount made available. 

Workforce and organizational support.—The Committee recommends $132,876,000 for workforce and organizational support 

the same as the budget request and $3,570,000 above the 2002 enacted level including increases above the 2002 level of $3,483,000 

for fixed costs, and $501,000 for administrative support, and a decrease of $414,000 for travel. 

The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 

positive environmental benefits achieved by the military through 

the implementation of pulse technology as a major component of its 

battery management programs. The Committee believes that the 

Bureau would also benefit significantly and directly from the use 

of this technology to extend the life of vehicle batteries. These benefits include savings in battery replacement costs, reduction in 

overall maintenance costs for vehicles and ancillary equipment, and 

a resultant increase in safety for personnel. The Committee urges 

the Bureau to incorporate this technology in its ongoing purchase 

and maintenance programs for vehicles. The Bureau should report 

to the Committee by December 31, 2002, on its plans to comply 

with this direction. Beginning with the fiscal year 2004 budget request, the budget submission should include an accounting of the 

18

extent to which battery pulse technology is being employed and the 

savings expected and realized as a result of the use of this technology. 

Challenge cost share.—The Committee recommends $18,973,000 

for Challenge Cost share the same as the budget request. The 

$10,000,000 increase for this high-priority activity is included 

under the conservation spending category. 

WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $678,421,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 653,754,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 655,332,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥23,089,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +1,578,000

The Committee recommends $655,332,000 for wildland fire management $1,578,000 above the budget request and $23,089,000 

below the 2002 enacted level. 

The appropriation includes $278,639,000 for preparedness and fire use, of which $12,374,000 has been provided for deferred maintenance and capital improvement, and $8,000,000 has been provided for the joint fire science program; $160,351,000 is for fire 

suppression operations; and $216,342,000 is for other operations of 

which $10,000,000 is for the rural fire assistance program, 

$74,935,000 is for hazardous fuels reduction, $111,407,000 is for 

the wildland urban interface, and $20,000,000 is for restoration 

and rehabilitation of burned over areas. Within the funds provided 

for wildland fire the Committee has included $152,000 to reimburse Trinity County, CA for expenses incurred in the 1999 

Lowden Fire. The Committee directs that the native plant restoration program and funding should be maintained at the fiscal year 

2002 level. 

Bill Language.—Language is included under Title I General Provisions allowing for wildland fire activities on non-Federal lands. 

Language is included under the wildland fire management account 

allowing the fire agencies to enter into fire facility leases with local 

communities. Language is also included under Title III—General 

Provisions allowing the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary 

of Agriculture to enter into reciprocal agreements with foreign nations. 

The Committee is concerned about rising suppression costs and 

the lack of incentives to consider costs during a large-fire incident. 

The Committee believes that cost containment should become more 

prominent among the priorities for suppressing wildland fires. 

Therefore, the Committee directs the Forest Service and the Department of the Interior to take the following steps designed to increase cost consciousness during such incidents: (1) directly monitor, evaluate, and report publicly on the costs of each large-fire incident following its conclusion; (2) evaluate and report on the cost 

effectiveness of all Type I and Type II incident management teams 

at the end of each fire season; (3) at the end of each year, evaluate 

and report on the fire costs of each Forest Service, National Park 

Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

and Fish and Wildlife land unit experiencing large wildfires that 

year; and (4) establish a uniform, automated cost-reporting system 

to support these requirements efficiently and effectively. 

19

The Committee is well aware that making progress in containing 

suppression costs will require a dedicated effort by many Federal 

and non-Federal cooperators pursuing a wide range of coordinated 

and vital activities on their own lands to manage hazardous fuels 

appropriately, mitigate wildland-urban interface hazards, and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of wildland fire suppression. 

Clearly, the resources required to meet these cross-boundary needs 

will be more than the Federal government alone can supply. Therefore, the Committee directs the Forest Service and the Department 

of the Interior to jointly develop equitable and effective collaborative mechanisms for prioritizing needed activities and sharing 

their costs among the various Federal, State, local, tribal, and private landowners involved, including those in wildland-urban interface communities.

To support development of such collaborative mechanisms, the 

Committee directs the Forest Service and the Department of the 

Interior to contract for a thorough, independent study of how potential mechanisms, such as a matching grant program, could 

work. This study shall consider how best to take advantage of relevant existing Federal programs for disaster mitigation, biomass 

utilization, and community and private fire protection programs. 

The Departments should equally share the cost of this study; a preliminary report should be available to the Committee by May 31, 

2003, and the final report should be completed by September 30, 

2003. 

The Committee is aware that the Forest Service and the four Interior bureaus participating in Wildland Fire Management activities use different systems and procedures for determining their 

readiness for control of wildfires. We have been informed that the 

Departments have been engaged in efforts to design and develop 

tools for fire program managers that would be used by the Forest 

Service and all of the Interior bureaus. The Committee is encouraged that the Departments have been working together to develop 

common systems to plan their activities; however, we are concerned 

that a complex system may require significant funding and take 

many years to develop. 

The Committee therefore directs the Departments to design and 

develop a focused automated system for preparedness resource 

planning to replace the systems currently in use by the fire management agencies. The Committee believes that a limited system 

can be designed and implemented by the end of fiscal year 2004. 

The development and design of the information technology system 

for fire preparedness will be conducted according to standard Federal regulations for planning, budgeting, acquisition and management of capital assets. The Committee further directs that the 

agencies deliver quarterly progress reports that describe project 

status and provide updated cost information. 

The Committee has been repeatedly disappointed with the inability of the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture to produce 

accurate and timely cost information regarding specific fire suppression projects. Agency officials have told us that this is the result of the use of different accounting and finance systems by the 

wildland fire management agencies. The Committee urges the Departments to consider the potential for unified accounting for the 

wildland fire management appropriation accounts in the future. 

20

The Committee recognizes that this would be a long-term effort. In 

the meantime, the Committee directs the agencies to establish 

standard coding practices and procedures for fire suppression activities beginning in fiscal year 2003. The Committee expects the 

agencies to develop a protocol that would work in each financial 

system and be followed by each agency. The protocol should provide 

clear, standard instructions for assigning cost codes to be used for 

each fire event. The protocol should be well understood and uniformly used by fire management and finance officers in each agency. The agencies will be expected to produce reports promptly when 

requested by the Committee. If there are any technical impediments to complying with this directive, agency finance officials 

must brief the Committee on those impediments and be prepared 

to offer alternative solutions to the project cost reporting problem. 

The Committee has recommended an additional appropriation of 

$200 million to cover unanticipated fiscal year 2002 wildland fire 

costs for the Bureau of Land Management. The 2002 fire season is 

shaping up to be one of the most catastrophic in recent memory. 

At the beginning of July the amount of forest and grasslands 

burned exceeded 3.1 million acres, a figure nearly triple the 10 

year average for this time of year and a figure almost 50 percent 

higher than the disastrous 2000 fire season. Officials at the National Interagency Fire Center have indicated publicly that they believe the peak of the western fire season has yet to come and the 

Bureau of Land Management has informed the Committee that its 

fire suppression budget model indicates that $200 million above the 

appropriations currently available to the agency would be required 

for the direct cost of fighting fires during 2002. The Committee believes that it is essential to provide these amounts in order to avoid 

undue disruptions either in the firefighting program or in other Departmental programs from which funds might have to be diverted 

if appropriations are inadequate. 

CENTRAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS FUND

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $9,978,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 9,978,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 9,978,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Central Hazardous Materials Fund was established to include funding for remedial investigations/feasibility studies and 

cleanup of hazardous waste sites for which the Department of the 

Interior is liable pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation and Liability Act and includes sums recovered from or paid by a party as reimbursement for remedial action or response activities. 

The Committee recommends $9,978,000 for the central hazardous materials fund. 

21

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $13,076,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 10,976,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 10,976,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥2,100,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $10,976,000 for construction the 

same as the budget request and $2,100,000 below the 2002 enacted 

level.

PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $210,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 165,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 230,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +20,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2001 ................................................................ +65,000,000

Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) provides for payments to local 

units of government containing certain federally owned lands. 

These payments are designed to supplement other Federal land receipt sharing payments that local governments may be receiving. 

Payments received may be used by the recipients for any governmental purpose. 

The Committee recommends $230,000,000 for PILT, of which 

$70,000,000 is derived from the conservation spending category. 

LAND ACQUISITION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $49,920,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 44,686,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 49,286,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥634,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +4,600,000

The Committee recommends $49,286,000 for land acquisition, an 

increase of $4,600,000 above the request and $634,000 below the 

enacted level. This amount includes $43,286,000 for line item 

projects, $1,500,000 for emergencies and hardships, $500,000 for 

land exchanges and $4,000,000 for acquisition management. 

The Committee recommends the following distribution of funds:

Committee 

Area and State Recommendation 

Beaver Creek Nat’l Wild & Scenic River/White Mountains NRA 

(AK) ..................................................................................................... $750,000 

Black Forest Lake (CA) ......................................................................... 650,000 

Carrizo Plain National Monument (CA) .............................................. 4,350,000 

Cerbat Foothills Recreation Area (AZ) ................................................. 500,000 

Continental Divide National Scenic Trail (WY) .................................. 536,000 

Cosumnes River Watershed (CA) ......................................................... 2,500,000 

El Dorado Preserve (CA) ....................................................................... 3,600,000 

Golden Bair Ranch (easement*) (CO) .................................................. 1,500,000 

Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (UT) ........................ 2,000,000 

King Range National Conservation Area (CA) .................................... 2,000,000 

Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail (ID) ..................................... 1,000,000 

Lewis and Clark National Historic Trail (MT) ................................... 1,000,000 

Lower Salmon River Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ID) 1,000,000 

Moses Coulee (WA) ................................................................................ 1,000,000 

National Historic Trails of Wyoming (WY) .......................................... 200,000 

Otay Mountains (CA) ............................................................................ 500,000 

Patterson Bend (CA) .............................................................................. 1,000,000

22

Committee 

Area and State Recommendation 

Potrero Creek (CA) ................................................................................ 3,000,000 

Rio Grande National Wild and Scenic River (NM) ............................. 4,500,000 

Sandy River (OR) ................................................................................... 2,500,000 

Santa Rosa and San Jacinto Mountains National Monument (CA) 1,000,000 

Scab Creek Special Recreation Management Area (WY) ................... 1,400,000 

Sears Pt Area of Critical Environmental concern/Juan Bautista De 

Anza NHT (AZ) .................................................................................. 800,000 

Snake River Birds of Prey National Conservation Area (ID) ............ 2,000,000 

Upper Crab Creek/Rock Creek (WA) .................................................... 1,000,000 

Upper Snake/South Fork Snake River (ID) ......................................... 2,000,000 

West Eugene Wetlands (OR) ................................................................ 1,000,000 

Subtotal: Federal Acquisition projects ...................................... 43,286,000 

Acquisition Management ....................................................................... 4,000,000 

Emergency/Inholdings/Relocation ......................................................... 1,500,000 

Land Exchange Equalization Payment ................................................ 500,000

Total ............................................................................................. 49,286,000 

*Note.—Easements are subject to public access.

Funds for the Golden Bair Ranch is conditioned on BLM providing public access to this property. The money for Consumnes 

River Watershed is restricted to conservation easements. The 

$1,000,000 for West Eugene Wetlands completes the federal share 

of this project. 

The land acquisition program is funded under the conservation 

spending category.

OREGON AND CALIFORNIA GRANT LANDS

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $105,165,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 105,633,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 105,633,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +468,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

23


Insert offset folio 04 HR564.004
24

The Committee recommends $105,633,000 for the Oregon and 

California grant lands the same as the budget request and 

$468,000 above the 2002 enacted level including an increase from 

the 2002 level of $1,068,000 for fixed costs and a decrease of 

$600,000 for travel. These funds are provided for construction and 

acquisition, operation and maintenance, and management activities 

on the revested lands in the 18 Oregon and California land grant 

counties of western Oregon.

RANGE IMPROVEMENTS

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $10,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 10,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 10,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 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

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $8,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 7,900,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 7,900,000 

Offsetting fees ..................................................................................... ¥7,900,000

The Committee recommends an indefinite appropriation estimated to be $7,900,000, 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, 2002 .............................................................. $12,405,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 12,405,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 12,405,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 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 

25

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 95 million acres across the United 

States, encompassing a 538-unit National Wildlife Refuge System, 

additional wildlife and wetlands areas, and 70 National Fish 

Hatcheries. A network of law enforcement agents and port inspectors enforce Federal laws for the protection of fish and wildlife. In 

fiscal year 2003, the Service will celebrate the 100th anniversary 

of the establishment of the National Wildlife Refuge System. 

RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $850,597,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 903,604,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 918,359,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +67,762,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +14,755,000

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

26


Insert offset folio 05 HR564.005
27


Insert offset folio 06 HR564.006
28

The Committee recommends $918,359,000 for resource manage- ment, an increase of $14,755,000 above the budget request and 

$67,762,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. Within this account, 

$60,006,000 for infrastructure improvement and $2,000,000 for the 

youth conservation corps is funded under the conservation spending category. Changes to the budget request are detailed below. 

Ecological services.—The Committee recommends $225,252,000 

for ecological services, an increase of $14,105,000 above the budget 

request. 

Within the ecological services activity, increases recommended for endangered species recovery programs include $3,000,000 for 

Washington State salmon grants to be administered through the 

National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, $500,000 for manatee protection, and $1,000,000 to address the backlog of recovery actions. 

Changes recommended for habitat conservation programs include increases of $7,430,000 for the Partners for Fish and Wildlife program and $1,675,000 for coastal programs. The increase for the 

Partners for Fish and Wildlife program includes $1,000,000 to continue the nutria eradication program at Blackwater NWR, MD, 

$500,000 to continue the Columbia River estuary research project, 

$1,100,000 for bull trout conservation in Washington State, 

$1,400,000 for the Washington State ecosystems project, $500,000 

for Georgia stream bank restoration, $750,000 for Walla Walla 

Basin habitat conservation planning, $1,000,000 for invasive species control, $1,000,000 for Spartina control in Willapa Bay, WA, 

and $180,000 in project planning to continue support for the New 

Jersey Meadowlands study. The increase for coastal programs includes $200,000 for the Long Live the Kings program, $175,000 for 

the Hood Canal Salmon Enhancement Group, $300,000 is for the 

programs in Tampa Bay and the Florida panhandle, and 

$1,000,000 for new cost shared projects with an emphasis on 

invasive species control. The increase for invasive species control 

(including Spartina control) are derived from the conservation 

spending category. 

An increase of $500,000 is recommended for the environmental 

contaminants program to address the program backlog. 

Refuges and wildlife.—The Committee recommends $458,717,000 

for refuges and wildlife, an increase of $2,000,000 above the budget 

request. 

Changes recommended for refuge operations and maintenance include an increase of $10,000,000 for refuge operations, of which 

$5,000,000 is to continue ‘‘minimum staffing’’ implementation, 

$3,000,000 is for the challenge cost share program for new cost 

shared projects with an emphasis on invasive species control, and 

$2,000,000 is for on refuge invasive species control using friends 

groups and volunteers. There are also decreases of $5,000,000 for 

the cooperative conservation initiative and $5,000,000 for refuge 

maintenance. The increases for challenge cost share and invasive 

species programs are derived from the conservation spending category. 

The Committee is aware that non-native invasive species are a 

serious problem for the National Wildlife Refuge System. It has 

been cited as the System’s top threat in a recent survey of refuge 

managers. Invasive plants degrade the valuable habitat for which 

the refuges were created. Over the past few years, the number of 

29

friends groups or support organizations for refuges has grown to 

more than 200. These groups provide a great potential for many 

volunteers to assist refuge staff in addressing the growing threat 

of non-native invasive species. The Committee recommends that 

the refuge system offer its fullest cooperation and encouragement 

for these volunteer forces by setting priority areas for cleanup, conducting appropriate training, and making available the proper supervision, tools, and equipment necessary for friends groups and 

volunteers to be effective in fighting invasive species on National 

Wildlife Refuges. 

The Committee encourages the Service to use other programs to 

support control of invasive species in and around refuges, including 

coastal wetlands restoration grants and the partners for fish and 

wildlife program. The Committee also encourages the continued 

use of the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to leverage Federal funds. 

A total of $998,000, the budget request, is recommended to continue the Salton Sea recovery program, contingent on matching 

funds from the State of California. The Committee does not object 

to including this program in the regular operations account in fiscal year 2004 and beyond. An increase of $2,000,000 is recommended for migratory bird management, of which $1,000,000 is to address goose depredation 

and $1,000,000 is to continue to advance the joint venture programs toward the fiscal year 2004 target funding levels outlined in 

the fiscal year 2001 statement of the managers that accompanied 

the conference report for that year. The Committee appreciates the 

Service’s requested increase for the joint ventures program in the 

budget request but notes that it is insufficient to make reasonable 

progress towards meeting the 2004 target funding levels. The Committee agrees to the following distribution of funds for joint ventures:

Joint venture Fiscal year 2002 Fiscal year 2003 Fiscal year 2004 

target 

Atlantic Coast ............................................................................................. 506,000 626,000 800,000 

Lower Mississippi ........................................................................................ 576,000 647,000 750,000 

Upper Mississippi ....................................................................................... 363,000 481,000 650,000

Prairie Pothole ............................................................................................. 1,248,000 1,310,000 1,400,000 

Gulf Coast ................................................................................................... 448,000 551,000 700,000 

Playa Lakes ................................................................................................. 369,000 505,000 700,000 

Rainwater Basin ......................................................................................... 278,000 328,000 400,000

Intermountain West ..................................................................................... 469,000 687,000 1,000,000 

Central Valley .............................................................................................. 417,000 471,000 550,000 

Pacific Coast ............................................................................................... 378,000 510,000 700,000 

San Francisco Bay ...................................................................................... 269,000 310,000 370,000 

Sonoran ....................................................................................................... 278,000 328,000 400,000 

Arctic Goose ................................................................................................ 210,000 276,000 370,000 

Black Duck .................................................................................................. 188,000 263,000 370,000 

Sea Duck ..................................................................................................... 340,000 426,000 550,000 

Administration ............................................................................................. 662,000 698,000 750,000 

Total ............................................................................................... 6,999,000 8,417,000 10,460,000

Fisheries.—The Committee recommends $104,663,000 for fisheries, an increase of $9,900,000 above the budget request, including 

increases of $5,000,000 for hatchery operations and maintenance, 

of which $4,000,000 is for the Washington State hatchery improvement project and $1,000,000 is to restore the fiscal year 2002 level 

for the hatchery program, and $4,900,000 for fish and wildlife manVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
30

agement, of which $500,000 is to complete reproductive biology/

salmon research at Washington State University, $500,000 is to restore funding for the Great Lakes fish and wildlife restoration program (these funds should remain in the base budget in future 

years), $2,000,000 is for cooperative fish passage projects, $900,000 

is for administrative costs associated with the Sea lamprey program, and $1,000,000 is for aquatic nuisance control, which is derived from the conservation spending category. The Committee 

notes that the increase for fish passage projects is part of a 

$20,000,000 bill-wide effort to address this critical problem. There 

is also $4,000,000 recommended in the Bureau of Land Management and $14,000,000 recommended in the Forest Service. Funding 

for the fish passage initiative is included under the infrastructure 

improvement subcategories of the conservation spending category. 

General Administration.—The Committee recommends 

$129,727,000 for general administration, a decrease of $11,250,000 

below the budget request, including increases of $750,000 to restore 

Servicewide support and $1,000,000 for a National Academy of 

Sciences review of the Service’s criteria for State Wildlife Grants 

plans and of State plans and a decrease of $13,000,000 for the cooperative conservation initiative. 

The Committee has not agreed to start a new cooperative conservation initiative but wholeheartedly supports the concept of cooperative efforts to address critical habitat restoration and protection needs. For the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Committee has 

recommended adding funding to existing programs that have a 

proven track record in this regard. The Committee has also placed 

an emphasis on addressing invasive species control through costshared projects. Recommended increases include $3,000,000 for the 

refuge challenge cost share program, $2,000,000 for on refuge 

invasive species control projects using friends groups and volunteers, $1,000,000 for invasive species control projects under the 

Partners for Fish and Wildlife program, $1,000,000 for Spartina 

control in Willapa Bay, Washington with the expectation that the 

State and other partners will provide additional funds to address 

this problem, $1,000,000 for the coastal programs, $1,000,000 for 

joint venture programs under migratory bird management, 

$2,000,000 for fish passage, and $1,000,000 for aquatic nuisance 

control. The Committee strongly encourages the Service to follow 

this model of using proven, existing programs to meet the goals of 

cooperative conservation. 

The Committee agrees to the following: 

1. The amount paid for the cost allocation methodology in the Resource Management account may only exceed that paid in fiscal 

year 2002 where such costs are clearly the direct result of increased space and increased staffing. The Service should consider 

contracting for an independent outside review of its cost allocation 

methodology by the National Academy of Public Administration. 

2. The Peregrine Fund should be funded at $400,000 in fiscal 

year 2003. 

3. The planning function for land acquisition has been transferred from the land acquisition account to the resource management account as proposed by the Service. The Service needs to establish strict criteria to evaluate new and expanded refuge proposals.

31

4. The Service should continue to assist the Corps of Engineers 

in their comprehensive review of alternative approaches to preserving the Meadowlands wetlands area in northern New Jersey 

and the Committee has provided $180,000 for this purpose. The 

Service should include the necessary funds for this effort in future 

budget submissions. 

5. The Service should continue its support and increase funding 

for joint venture programs in order to achieve the target funding 

level by fiscal year 2004. This program continues to be one of the 

greatest successes of the Service; with funding leveraged to a greater extent than all other Service programs combined. 

6. The Committee continues to be concerned about the Service’s 

inability to complete its strategic plan for fisheries. In answer to 

a hearing question for the record, the Service responded by reporting on the status of a plan for hatcheries. The continuing emphasis 

on hatcheries rather than on habitat protection and restoration has 

been a continuing problem with the fisheries program. 

7. The Committee strongly supports the Service’s efforts to obtain 

reimbursement from the Bureau of Reclamation for mitigation production at the Jones Hole NFH and the Hotchkiss NFH. Those 

funds should be used to address the most critical hatchery maintenance needs. 

8. The proposed program reduction for hatcheries is rejected 

without prejudice. Such proposals in the future must be in the context of the strategic plan for fisheries and must be fully explained 

and justified in the budget request before the Committee will consider them. 

9. The Committee supports the consolidation of the Service’s Diversity and Civil Rights Division. This is the type of specific management reform that should be pursued by the Service and the Department rather than assessing arbitrary funding reductions 

against all programs. The Committee also supports the limited use 

of funds by the Service to contract for employment-related legal 

services. 

10. Support costs managed at the regional office and headquarters levels must be budgeted under the regional office operations and headquarters operations line items. No assessments or 

‘‘cross-charges’’ should be imposed on program accounts to cover 

these costs or costs associated with regional or headquarters initiatives. 

11. The Service should continue to support the Forest Service’s 

Carhart Center at the same level as in fiscal year 2002. 

12. The ongoing drought in the Southwest continues to place certain species recovery programs in jeopardy. The Committee compliments the Service for moving towards increased Silvery minnow 

captive breeding efforts rather than relying solely on river habitat 

as in the past. The Service should expand these options to other 

streams throughout the Southwest. 

13. Last year the Congress directed an independent review of the 

science committee review on the progress of the Mexican gray wolf 

reintroduction program in New Mexico and Arizona. The Service 

has not complied with that direction. Questions of potential conflicts of interest and other controversies surrounding the program 

could further damage the recovery effort if an independent review 

is not undertaken. The Committee recognizes that there has been 

32

some improvement in the program’s relationships with local governments and citizens, but previous program decisions have resulted in significant distrust of the Service’s management of the 

program. The Service should continue to work closely with impacted local communities and their elected officials. The Committee 

is concerned that the Service appears to approach the wolf reintroduction program as a public relations exercise and overstates the 

success of the program rather than resolving problems and issues. 

The Service should consult with the Committee on how it will fund 

additional USDA Wildlife Services personnel in the future and on 

any plans to deviate from the original wolf reintroduction plan. The 

Committee also expects the Service to oppose strongly third party 

lawsuits aimed at adding additional costly requirements for reintroduction program operations on local ranchers. 

14. The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 

positive environmental benefits achieved by the military through 

the implementation of pulse technology as a major component of its 

battery management programs. The Committee believes that the 

Fish and Wildlife Service would also benefit significantly and directly from the use of this technology to extend the life of vehicle 

batteries. These benefits include savings in battery replacement 

costs, reduction in overall maintenance costs for vehicles and ancillary equipment, and a resultant increase in safety for personnel. 

The Committee urges the Service to incorporate this technology in 

its ongoing purchase and maintenance programs for vehicles. The 

Service should report to the Committee by December 31, 2002, on 

its plans to comply with this direction. Beginning with the fiscal 

year 2004 budget request, the budget submission should include an 

accounting of the extent to which battery pulse technology is being 

employed and the savings expected and realized as a result of the 

use of this technology. 

15. The Committee encourages the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to support the Caddo Lake Ramsar Wetlands Science 

project within the increases provided by the Committee for resource management. The Caddo Lake wetlands are classified as 

Resource Category 1 wetlands by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and provide habitat for a number of endangered species. Further, this project will develop model programs for community-based and locally-designed wetlands conservation. 

Bill language.—The Committee recommends bill language permitting the limited use of funds for incidental expenses related to 

promoting and celebrating the Refuge Centennial. The Committee 

understands that these expenses will be cost-shared by friends 

groups and other private contributions. 

Bill language is also included, under General Provisions, Department of the Interior, requiring the Service to implement fully the 

fish marking program related to efforts to preserve endangered 

species of salmon. This action has been taken because of the significant endangered species benefits derived from applying a visual 

mark to hatchery fish, most notably the ability to monitor easily 

and manage hatchery stray rates, and to differentiate hatchery fish 

from natural fish for broodstock management and stock assessment 

purposes. The Committee expects the Service to be a full participant in this effort by ensuring that hatchery fish that are suitable/

33

available for selective fisheries are visually marked to assist in the 

identification and recovery of wild salmonid stocks.

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $55,543,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 35,402,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 51,308,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥4,235,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +15,906,000 

The Committee recommends $51,308,000 for construction, a decrease of $4,235,000 below the fiscal year 2002 level and 

$15,906,000 above the budget request. 

The Committee agrees to the following distribution of funds:

[Dollars in thousands] 

Project Description Budget 

request 

Committee 

recommendation Difference 

Bear River NWR, UT ...................................... Dikes and related facilities [cc] .................. 0 1,000 1,000 

Big Branch Marsh NWR, LA .......................... Restroom/support facility [c] ....................... 0 150 150 

Bitter Lake NWR, NM .................................... Visitor center/standard design [d/c] ........... 0 1,950 1,950 

Black-Footed Ferret Wildlife Research Ctr, 

CO.

Endangered species facility [cc] ................. 3,240 3,240 0 

Bosque del Apache NWR, NM ....................... Equipment for salt cedar control ................ 0 400 400 

Bozeman Fish Technology Center, MT .......... Seismic safety/3 building rehab [p/d] ........ 150 150 0 

Bozeman Fish Technology Center, MT .......... Laboratory/administration building [c] ........ 500 500 0 

Bridge Safety Inspections (Servicewide) ...... ....................................................................... 560 560 0 

Clark R. Bavin Forensics Laboratory, OR ..... Security upgrades ........................................ 765 765 0 

Clark R. Bavin Forensics Laboratory, OR ..... Forensics laboratory expansion [c] .............. 6,235 6,235 0 

Craig Brook NFH, ME .................................... Wastewater treatment compliance [p] ........ 200 200 0 

Dam Safety Program (Servicewide) .............. ....................................................................... 1,365 1,365 0 

D. C. Booth NFH, SD ..................................... Exhibits for visitor center ............................ 0 550 550 

Harris Neck NWR, GA .................................... Office renovation .......................................... 0 350 350 

Iron River NFH, WI ........................................ Replace domes at Schacte Creek [cc] ........ 2,000 2,000 0 

Jackson NFH, WY ........................................... Seismic safety rehabilitation [d] ................. 80 80 0 

Jordon River NFH, MI .................................... M/V Togue/Great Lakes stocking vessel [d] 800 800 0 

Klamath Basin NWR complex, CA ................ Water supply and management ................... 1,000 1,000 0 

Northwest Power Planning Area ................... Fish screens, etc. ......................................... 0 4,000 4,000 

Orangeburg NFH, SC ..................................... Orangeburg substation dam [cc] ................ 4,144 4,144 0 

Ottawa NWR, OH ........................................... Visitor center/standard design [d/c] ........... 1,100 1,950 850 

Quilcene NFH, WA ......................................... Seismic safety rehab of hatchery building 

[d].

45 45 0 

Sachuest Point NWR, RI ............................... Exhibits for visitor center ............................ 0 250 250 

Savannah NWR, GA ....................................... Visitor center/standard design [d/c] ........... 1,100 1,950 850 

Security upgrades (Servicewide) ................... ....................................................................... 1,700 1,700 0 

Shawangunk NWR, NY .................................. Demolish runways [p/d] ............................... 0 300 300 

Sonny Bono Salton Sea NWR, CA ................. Seismic safety rehab of shop building [cc] 200 200 0 

Visitor Contact Stations ................................ Several locations/standard design .............. 0 2,000 2,000 

Wolf Creek NFH, KY ....................................... Visitor center [cc] ........................................ 0 1,800 1,800

Subtotal, Line Item Construction .... ....................................................................... 25,184 39,634 14,450

Nationwide Engineering Services: 

Cost Allocation Methodology ................ ....................................................................... 3,000 3,000 0

Environmental Compliance Management........................................................................ 1,400 1,856 456 

Seismic Safety Program ....................... ....................................................................... 200 200 0 

Waste Prevention and Recycling ......... ....................................................................... 150 150 0 

Other Engineering Services .................. ....................................................................... 5,468 6,468 1,000

Subtotal, Nationwide Engineering 

Services.

....................................................................... 10,218 11,674 1,456

34

[Dollars in thousands] 

Project Description Budget 

request 

Committee 

recommendation Difference 

Total ................................................. ....................................................................... 35,402 51,308 15,906 

The Committee agrees to the following: 

1. No administrative or other assessments may be levied against 

individual projects. All administrative overhead should be budgeted 

in the nationwide engineering services activity or in the general operations activity under Resource Management. This instruction 

also applies to funds available from prior years. 

2. The Committee has recommended restoring funds for the Service’s demolition and environmental compliance needs. These funds 

should be continued and increased, as needed, in future budget requests. 

3. The Committee strongly supports the standardized design approach for visitor centers and visitor contact stations, and the efforts of Friends Groups and others to provide cost sharing for these 

facilities. The Committee recommends providing the full Federal 

share of funding for 3 facilities—Ottawa NWR, Savannah NWR, 

and Bitter Lake NWR—with the understanding that each of these 

projects will be supplemented with private funds. 

4. The Service should use prior year balances from completed 

projects to complete the exhibits at the Great Falls Discovery Center in Turner Falls, MA. This is a cooperative effort between the 

Silvio O. Conte National Wildlife Refuge, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management, and seven other partners. The Committee understands that no more than $200,000 will 

be used to complete these exhibits. 

Bill language is recommended to permit the Service to enter into 

a contract for the full scope of the Clark R. Bavin Forensics Laboratory, OR expansion effort. 

LAND ACQUISITION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $99,135,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 70,384,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 82,250,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥16,885,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +11,866,000 

The Committee recommends $82,250,000 for land acquisition, an increase of $11,866,000 above the budget request and $16,885,000 

below the enacted level. This amount includes $64,750,000 for line 

item projects, $2,000,000 for inholdings, $2,000,000 for emergencies 

and hardships, $1,000,000 for exchanges, $2,500,000 for cost allocation methodology and $10,000,000 for acquisition management. 

The Committee recommends the following distribution of funds:

Committee 

Area and State Recommendation 

Alaska Peninsula NWR (TDX) (AK) ..................................................... $2,500,000 

Baca Ranch (CO) .................................................................................... 5,000,000 

Back Bay NWR (VA) ............................................................................. 1,000,000 

Balconies/Canyonlands NWR (TX) ....................................................... 1,000,000 

Buenos Aires NWR (AZ) ........................................................................ 500,000 

Cahaba River NWR (AL) ....................................................................... 3,000,000 

Cat Island NWR (LA) ............................................................................ 2,500,000 

35

Committee 

Area and State Recommendation 

Dakota Tallgrass Prairie WMA (ND/SD) ............................................. 1,000,000 

Detroit River NWR (MI) ........................................................................ 3,500,000 

Edwin B. Forsythe NWR (NJ) .............................................................. 2,250,000 

Great Meadows NWR (MA) .................................................................. 1,600,000 

Great Swamp NWR (NJ) ....................................................................... 1,000,000 

J.N. ‘‘Ding’’ Darling NWR (FL) ............................................................. 3,000,000 

Lower Suwannee NWR (FL) ................................................................. 1,000,000 

Minnesota Valley NWR (MN) ............................................................... 4,000,000 

National Key Deer Refuge (FL) ............................................................ 1,000,000 

Northern Tallgrass Prairie NWR (MN/IA) .......................................... 1,000,000 

Ottawa NWR (OH) ................................................................................ 500,000 

Pelican Island NWR (FL) ...................................................................... 1,750,000 

Pond Creek NWR (AR) .......................................................................... 1,000,000 

Prime Hook NWR (DE) ......................................................................... 1,350,000 

Quinault Indian Reservation (WA) ...................................................... 5,000,000 

Rappahannock River Valley NWA (VA) ............................................... 3,000,000 

Red River NWR (LA) ............................................................................. 500,000 

San Diego NWR (CA) ............................................................................ 2,000,000 

San Joaquin River NWR (CA) .............................................................. 2,500,000 

Savannah NWR (GA) Mulberry Grove ................................................. 4,000,000 

Silvio O. Conte NFWR (VT/NH/MA/CT) .............................................. 1,000,000 

St. Marks NWR (FL) ............................................................................. 2,000,000 

Stewart B. McKinney NWR (CT) ......................................................... 1,000,000 

Trinity River NWR (TX) ........................................................................ 500,000 

Wallkill River NWR (NJ/NY) ................................................................ 2,300,000 

Western Montana Project (MT) ............................................................ 750,000 

Willapa NWR (WA) ................................................................................ 750,000 

Subtotal: Federal Acquisition projects ...................................... $64,750,000 

Acquisition Management ....................................................................... 10,000,000 

Emergency & Hardship ......................................................................... 2,000,000 

Exchanges ............................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Inholdings ............................................................................................... 2,000,000 

Cost Allocation Methodology ................................................................. 2,500,000 

Total ............................................................................................. $82,250,000

The Committee was disappointed with the Service’s fiscal year 

2003 budget submission and continues to encourage the Service to 

institute much needed reforms in the acquisition priority system.

The land acquisition program is funded under the conservation 

spending category. 

LANDOWNER INCENTIVE PROGRAM

The Landowner Incentive program provides funds to States, territories and tribes for matching, competitively awarded grants to 

establish or supplement landowner incentive programs that provide 

technical and financial assistance to private landowners. The purpose of these incentive programs is to restore and protect habitat 

of Federally listed, proposed or candidate species under the Endangered Species Act, or other at risk species on private lands. Eligible 

grantees include the States, the District of Columbia, Indian 

Tribes, Puerto Rico, Guam, the U. S. Virgin Islands, the Northern 

Mariana Islands, and American Samoa.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $40,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 50,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 40,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ ¥10,000,000 

The Committee recommends $40,000,000 for the landowner incentive program, a $10,000,000 decrease from the budget request 

36

and equal to the 2002 level. The Committee has not agreed to increase funding for this program for two reasons: (1) the fiscal year 

2002 funds have not yet been spent and (2) many of these projects 

should qualify for funds under the recently enacted farm bill. One 

key purpose of the landowner incentive program, as reported by the 

Service, is restoration of marginal farmlands to wetlands and the 

Service should work closely with the Department of Agriculture to 

ensure projects funded under the farm bill complement and supplement the Service’s landowner programs to the maximum extent 

possible. 

STEWARDSHIP GRANTS

The private stewardship grants program provides grants and 

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

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $10,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 10,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 10,000,000

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for the private stewardship grants program, the same as the budget request and the fiscal 

year 2002 level. 

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, 2002 .............................................................. $96,235,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 91,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 121,400,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +25,165,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +30,400,000 

The Committee recommends $121,400,000 for the cooperative endangered species conservation fund, an increase of $30,400,000 

above the budget request and $25,165,000 above the 2002 level. Increases include $30,000,000 for habitat conservation plan land acquisition and $400,000 for administration. The recommended level 

is necessary to address the growing demand for HCP land acquisition. This program is funded under the conservation spending category. 

Bill language is recommended to derive the HCP land acquisition 

portion of this account from the Land and Water Conservation 

Fund, instead of deriving the entire funding from the LWCF as 

proposed in the budget request. 

37

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 $26,528,000 in fiscal year 

2003 with $19,414,000 derived from this appropriation and 

$7,114,000 from net refuge receipts estimated to be collected in fiscal year 2002.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $14,414,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 14,414,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 19,414,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +5,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +5,000,000 

The Committee recommends $19,414,000 for the National wildlife refuge fund, an increase of $5,000,000 above both the budget 

request and the fiscal year 2002 funding level. Within the amount 

recommended, $5,000,000 is derived from the conservation spending category. 

The Committee continues to be concerned about the priorities of 

the Service with respect to meeting its obligations under the National wildlife refuge fund. The Committee strongly disagrees with 

the Service’s emphasis on acquiring more land without commensurate funding increases for the national wildlife refuge fund. Refuge 

revenue sharing payments have dropped from 66 percent of the authorized level in 1998 to 55 percent in 2002. With the $5,000,000 

increase recommended by the Committee, the payments will be 

raised to 70 percent of the authorized 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 48 States, 10 

Canadian provinces, 21 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, 2002 .............................................................. $43,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 43,560,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 43,560,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +60,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends $43,560,000 for the North American 

wetlands conservation fund, equal to the budget request and an increase of $60,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. This program is 

funded under the conservation spending category. 

38

The Committee expects the Service to institute administrative reforms in the North American wetlands conservation program. Specifically, the number of site visits by Council staff should be reduced and only one person should be sent to a site visit (two are 

sent now). In addition, the Service should not pay airfare for Council staff to attend Council meetings and more Council meetings 

should be conducted in the Washington, D.C. area. The savings 

from these reforms should be directed toward systematic monitoring of completed projects; periodic audits of grantees; evaluation 

of the biological effectiveness of the NAWCA program; and implementing an electronic grants process. The Service should report to 

the Committee no later than January 31, 2003, on its plans to implement these reforms and should report annually in the budget 

justification on progress in this area. 

Bill Language is continued specifying that the increase above the 

fiscal year 2001 level is to be devoted to projects in the United 

States. The Committee has recommended continuing this language 

based upon the large number of high priority unfunded project applications in the U.S. as compared with project applications from 

Canada and Mexico. 

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, 2002 .............................................................. $3,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 0 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 5,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +2,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +5,000,000 

The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for the neotropical mi- gratory bird conservation program, an increase of $5,000,000 above 

the budget request and $2,000,000 above the 2002 level. The Administration proposed $1,000,000 for this program as part of the 

multinational species conservation fund. This program is funded 

under the conservation spending category. 

This program provides critically needed resources for conservation of neotropical migratory birds. The Committee expects the 

Service to continue to administer this grant program through the 

Service’s division of bird habitat conservation, following the model 

of the North American wetlands conservation program, and in close 

coordination with the Service’s international program. 

MULTINATIONAL SPECIES CONSERVATION FUND

This account combines funding for programs under the former rewards and operations (African elephant) account, the former rhinoceros and tiger conservation account, the Asian elephant conservation program, and the great ape conservation program. 

The African Elephant Act of 1988 established a fund for assisting 

nations and organizations involved with conservation of African 

elephants. The Service provides grants to African Nations and to 

39

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 government, the CITES secretariat, and non-governmental organizations for the conservation of great apes.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $4,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 5,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 4,800,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +800,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ ¥200,000 

The Committee recommends $4,800,000 for the multinational 

species conservation fund, an increase of $800,000 above the fiscal 

year 2002 level and $200,000 below the budget request. Changes 

to the budget request include a decrease of $1,000,000 for 

neotropical migratory birds (which is funded in a separate account) 

and an increase of $800,000, which includes $200,000 each for African elephant conservation, rhinoceros and tiger conservation, Asian 

elephant conservation, and great ape conservation. The Committee 

expects these funds to be matched by non-Federal funding to leverage private contributions to the maximum extent possible. This 

program is funded under the conservation spending category. 

STATE WILDLIFE GRANTS

The State wildlife grant 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. This program is funded under the conservation 

spending category.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $60,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 60,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 100,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +40,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +40,000,000

The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for State wildlife 

grants, an increase of $40,000,000 above both the budget request 

and the 2002 level, after adjusting for the $25,000,000 rescission in 

the 2002 Act. Within the amount provided, $5,000,000 is for competitively awarded grants to Indian tribes. 

40

The Committee notes that the State wildlife grants program has 

had numerous problems with implementation over the past two 

years and reminds the Service that the centerpiece to a strong program must be solid, scientifically-based State plans. These plans 

should address the conservation of each State’s or eligible entity’s 

full array of wildlife and stress on the ground restoration and protection of habitat for the species of greatest concern. State plans 

should not be approved if they do not meet the standards set by 

the Service. 

The Committee has recommended a $1,000,000 increase in the 

Service’s resource management appropriation for the Service to 

contract with the National Academy of Sciences to ensure that the 

criteria established by the Service for State plans under the State 

wildlife grants program are appropriate and that those standards 

are strictly adhered to in each State plan. The Service should proceed with the distribution of funds and the implementation of the 

program. There should be no disruption or delay pending the Academy’s review. 

Each State or eligible entity has two years to enter into specific 

grant agreements with the Service using fiscal year 2003 funding. 

If funds remain unobligated at the end of fiscal year 2004, the unobligated funds will be reapportioned to all States and eligible entities, together with any new appropriations provided in fiscal year 

2005. 

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. 

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 

385 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. 

41

OPERATION OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $1,487,075,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 1,584,565,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 1,605,593,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +118,518,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +21,028,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

42


Insert offset folio 07 HR564.007
43

The Committee recommends $1,605,593,000 for the operation of 

the National Park System for fiscal year 2003, an increase of 

$21,028,000 above the budget request and $118,518,000 above the 

enacted level. The Committee has provided an additional 

$21,028,000 in new funds and redirected $15,000,000 of the funds 

proposed for a new initiative to pay the full amount needed for uncontrollable expenses, to restore the $4,000,000 for CESI, and to 

provide a $20,000,000 base increase for the parks. 

While the Committee commends the Administration for providing 

substantial increases in the repair/rehabilitation and cyclic accounts to prevent new backlog maintenance needs and to maintain 

recently refurbished projects, there is still concern that the parks 

basic operational budgets have seriously eroded over time. This is 

one of the reasons that the Committee has supported the development of business plans. The Committee encourages the Administration to consider the parks’ operational shortfalls along with the 

backlog maintenance needs in the 2004 budget submission. The Committee expects that the $20,000,000 increase be spent 

exclusively on park base increases and the nationally designated 

trails with only one exception. The Service may spend up to 

$750,000 to expand the Business Plan program. The Committee 

continues to be pleased by the improvements and refinements that 

the Service is making on this initiative. The Committee expects 

that some of this new funding will be used for salaries and training 

costs to initiate a formal intake program to attract more of these 

exceptional students to permanent employment within the Park 

Service. These students possess the training and skills in disciplines that are too rare in the Service. The Committee encourages 

the Service to continue working with the National Parks Conservation Association to attain additional private funding to further advance this program. 

Resource Stewardship.—The Committee recommends 

$346,320,000 for resource stewardship, an increase of $11,397,000 

above the request and $28,008,000 above the enacted level. Included in this amount are increases above the enacted level of 

$6,658,000 for base operations, $6,900,000 for inventory and monitoring, $4,250,000 to accelerate natural resource inventories, 

$3,100,000 to assess watershed conditions, $500,000 to monitor 

water quality in parks, $200,000 for water resource protection and 

restoration, $400,000 for additional cooperative ecosystem study 

units, $2,150,000 for native and exotic species management, 

$500,000 to complete resource projects in Alaska, and $4,450,000 

for uncontrollable increases. Programmatic decreases include a reduction of $100,000 for greenspace for living, and a general travel 

reduction of $1,000,000. 

The $4,000,000 to continue the critical ecosystems studies initiative in the Everglades has been retained. In addition, the Committee does not accept the proposed language requiring $9,000,000 

to be provided as reimbursement to USGS for Natural Resource 

Challenge related programs and activities. The Committee understands that USGS has been a partner in the Challenge and that 

many Challenge activities are appropriately carried out using 

USGS. However, the Committee believes that USGS should continue to be used as the vendor or partner of choice where it is the 

best source for completing the work as determined by the Park 

44

Service natural resource managers. The Committee directs that 

funding for the Challenge only be reimbursed for the same types 

of activities previously carried out by USGS and not be used where 

other sources can provide and have provided similar services and 

products efficiently in the past. 

Visitor Services.—The Committee recommends $322,664,000 for 

visitor services, an increase of $12,983,000 above the budget request and $25,573,000 above the enacted level. Included in this 

amount are increases above the enacted level of $13,505,000 for 

base increases, $5,617,000 for counter terrorism, $1,500,000 for 

concessions management, and $7,528,000 for uncontrollable expenses. Programmatic decreases include $880,000 for one time 

2002 Winter Olympics funding and a general travel reduction of 

$1,697,000. 

Maintenance.—The Committee recommends $539,660,000 for 

maintenance, an increase of $8,232,000 above the request and 

$58,459,000 above the enacted level. Included in this amount are 

increases above the enacted level of $7,509,000 for base increases, 

$481,000 for counter terrorism, $500,000 for project management 

information systems, $1,000,000 for a strategic business advisor, 

$8,400,000 for repair and rehabilitation, $7,640,000 for condition 

assessments, $1,600,000 for facility maintenance software system, 

$25,000,000 for cyclic maintenance and $8,171,000 for uncontrollable expenses. There is a programmatic decrease of $1,842,000 for 

travel. 

Within funds available for the repair/rehabilitation and cyclic maintenance accounts, the Service should provide $233,000 for the 

Bachlott House and $45,000 for the St. Mary’s Museum at Cumberland Island NS, $400,000 to repair historic structures at Great 

Smokey Mountains NP and $200,000 for repairs at Belle Haven 

Marina within the George Washington Memorial Parkway. 

Park Support.—The Committee recommends $288,713,000 for 

park support, a decrease of $11,584,000 below the request and 

$13,688,000 above the enacted level. Included in this amount are 

increases above the enacted level of $1,659,000 for base increases, 

$7,000,000 for the existing challenge cost share program, $700,000 

for servicewide IT planning and management, $100,000 for Glen 

Canyon Dam adaptive management, and $5,457,000 for uncontrollable expenses. There is a programmatic decrease of $1,228,000 for 

travel. The $7,000,000 challenge cost share increase is funded 

under the conservation spending category. 

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 also directs the Service 

to provide $1,000,000 to support work on the creation of an integrated ‘‘Geographic Information System’’ (GIS) for the National 

Trail System. 

External Administrative Costs.—The Committee recommends 

$108,236,000 for external administrative costs, the same as the 

budget request and $2,888,000 above the enacted level. Included in 

this amount is an increase above the enacted level of $2,888,000 for 

fixed costs. 

South Florida Initiative.—The Committee is concerned about recent efforts to alter significantly the Interim Operational Plan 

(IOP) for the protection of the Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow. The 

45

proposed new plan appears to pose significant threats to the park, 

in the form of water pollution and disruption of natural water 

flows, and may compromise the ability to move forward with true 

restoration. The Committee is concerned that the proposed IOP 

may not be operated in a way that is consistent with the authorized purposes of the modified water deliveries and C–111 projects. 

The Committee directs the Everglades National Park to prepare 

a comprehensive report concerning possible impacts of the proposed 

IOP on water quality in the park, and the preservation and restoration of natural hydrologic regimes. The report must be submitted to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations by 

September 30, 2003. The Service is also directed to list the IOP 

project components and their funding sources. This report should 

be submitted by December 1, 2002. 

The Committee has included bill language under the Service’s 

land acquisition account directing the expeditious completion of the 

flood protection system for the 8.5 square mile area and clarifying 

that Congress intended the Army Corps of Engineers to implement 

a flood protection system known as ‘‘alternative 6D’’ which combines both land acquisition within the 8.5 square mile area and 

construction of an interior levee and seepage canal to provide the 

necessary flood protection to the 8.5 square mile area. 

In addition, consistent with the Committee’s longheld position 

that, to ensure true restoration of the natural system, it is imperative that the Secretary of the Interior have a co-equal role with the 

Army Corps of Engineers and the State of Florida, bill language is 

included under General Provisions, Department of the Interior 

mandating that the Secretary of the Interior be a full partner on 

the interagency RECOVER team. This is done to ensure that the 

Interior Department’s technical expertise is fully incorporated and 

that the primary Federal interest in the Comprehensive Plan, the 

restoration of the Everglades, is achieved. 

Park Construction.—The Committee continues to be concerned 

about the scope and cost of visitor facilities proposed by the Service. Given the magnitude of the deferred maintenance backlog, it 

is crucial that all levels of Park Service leadership take responsibility for assuring that projects are conceptualized with the needs 

of the rest of the system taken into consideration. Currently, the 

Service appears to condone the practice of superintendents and 

planners seeking funding for construction projects outside of the 

Service’s own construction priority setting process. While these attempts, may in some cases be successful, they are accomplished at 

the expense of their colleagues’ projects which are included in the 

budget request and removed to accommodate lower priority 

projects. 

While OMB and the Service often mistakenly view these substitutions as Congressional add-ons or earmarks, it is important to 

recognize that the entire line item construction program is earmarked by the Administration in the annual budget submission 

and that, as mentioned above, many ‘‘earmarks’’ are initiated at 

the park level. If the Service is truly interested in seeing its priorities followed, it must become more proactive in admonishing and 

disciplining the internal proponents of projects that are presented 

to Congress outside of the budget process.

46

Partnerships.—The Committee continues to support the use of 

partnerships to achieve park goals. However, given the backlog 

maintenance needs and operational shortfalls of the parks, the 

Committee encourages the Service to be cautious about increasing 

funding and new staffing to achieve this purpose. The Service has 

many existing employees who are accomplished at developing 

strong partnerships and the Committee encourages the Service to 

use this internal expertise. 

The Committee has had a great deal of experience with the larger, expensive partnership projects, which include some successes 

and failures. Based on this experience, the Committee makes the 

following observations and suggestions. Ideas for good partnerships 

don’t always have to originate with the park but they should further a park priority. The Service should consult and communicate 

with partners and Service leadership but also with the Committee 

before large-scale project commitments are made. When sharing expenses for a building, the Service should be cautious about starting 

a project before all funds are in hand—both the Federal and nonFederal contributions. Finally the Service should make sure that 

the partnership agreement is in writing. There have been many instances where the project scope changes and the partners and the 

Committee have a different recollection of the original commitment. 

Other.—The Committee supports the decision by Ozark National 

Scenic Riverways to retain the carpentry and maintenance positions at the park. The Committee recognizes the urgent needs at 

ONSR for key carpentry and maintenance personnel who have specialized skills in properly maintaining park facilities. The Committee expects that these carpentry and maintenance positions will 

be retained. 

The Committee urges the Service to give priority consideration to 

provide sufficient funds for necessary repairs, maintenance, facility 

improvements and staffing at the Wright Brothers National Memorial and Cape Hatteras National Seashore in preparation for the 

First Flight Centennial celebration. 

The Service should continue to support the Carhart Center at the 

same level as provided in fiscal year 2002. 

The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 

positive environmental benefits achieved by the military through 

the implementation of pulse technology as a major component of its 

battery management programs. The Committee believes that the 

National Park Service would also benefit significantly and directly 

from the use of this technology to extend the life of vehicle batteries. These benefits include savings in battery replacement costs, 

reduction in overall maintenance costs for vehicles and ancillary 

equipment, and a resultant increase in safety for personnel. The 

Committee urges the Service to incorporate this technology in its 

ongoing purchase and maintenance programs for vehicles. The 

Service should report to the Committee by December 31, 2002, on 

its plans to comply with this direction. Beginning with the fiscal 

year 2004 budget request, the budget submission should include an 

accounting of the extent to which battery pulse technology is being 

employed and the savings expected and realized as a result of the 

use of this technology. 

The Committee is aware of recent developments relating to the 

identification of the site of the first official residence of the PresiVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
47

dent of the United States at the current location of Independence 

National Historic Park in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. It has been 

discovered that George Washington and his household, including 

eight African American slaves, were quartered at the first Executive Mansion for six and one half years. Therefore, given the historical significance of this issue, the Committee urges the National 

Park Service to appropriately commemorate the concerns raised regarding the recognition of the existence of the Mansion and the 

slaves who worked in it during the first years of our democracy. 

Furthermore the Committee directs the Director of the National 

Park Service to submit a report to the Committee no later than 

March 31, 2003, detailing the actions taken at Independence National Historic Park to properly address and resolve this issue. 

The Committee urges the National Park Service to continue 

making the War for Freedom Project a priority. The War for Freedom Project, a collaboration between the National Park Foundation, the University of Maryland and the National Park Service is 

a national, internet based curriculum to help students at all levels 

better understand the Civil War Period using letters written by African Americans and National Park Service War sites as resources. 

Bill language is included which prohibits the creation of a new 

Associate Director for Law Enforcement, Protective and Emergency 

Service. 

UNITED STATES PARK POLICE

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $90,555,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 78,431,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 78,431,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥12,124,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $78,431,000 for the United States 

Park Police, the same as the budget request and a decrease of 

$12,124,000 below the enacted level. The decrease below 2002 reflects one time security enhancement costs. 

NATIONAL RECREATION AND PRESERVATION

The National recreation and preservation appropriation provides 

for the outdoor recreation planning, preservation of cultural and 

National heritage resources, technical assistance to Federal, State 

and local agencies, administration of Historic Preservation Fund 

grants and statutory and contractual aid.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $66,159,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 46,824,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 56,330,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥9,829,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +9,506,000

The Committee recommends $56,330,000 for national recreation 

and preservation, an increase of $9,506,000 above the request and 

$9,829,000 below the enacted level. 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimate by activity are shown in the following table:

48


Insert offset folio 08 HR564.008
49

Recreation programs.—The Committee recommends $552,000 for 

recreation programs, the same as the budget request and $3,000 

above the enacted level. 

Natural programs.—The Committee recommends $10,948,000 for 

natural programs, the same as the budget request and $18,000 

above the enacted level. 

Cultural programs.—The Committee recommends $21,298,000 

for cultural programs, an increase of $1,550,000 above the request 

and $529,000 above the enacted level. The Committee has retained 

the $300,000 for Heritage Preservation Inc, and the $250,000 to 

continue the Louisiana Heritage Education Model at the National 

Center for Preservation Technology Training located in 

Natchitoches, Louisiana. In addition, the Committee has provided 

$1,000,000 for National Register programs. 

International park affairs.—The Committee recommends 

$1,719,000 for international park affairs, the same as the budget 

request and $1,000 above the enacted level. 

Environmental and compliance review.—The Committee recommends $400,000 for environmental and compliance review, the 

same as the budget request and $3,000 above the enacted level. 

Grant Administration.—The Committee recommends $1,585,000 

for grant administration, the same as the budget request and 

$3,000 above the enacted level. 

Heritage Partnership Programs.—The Committee recommends 

$14,889,000 for heritage partnership programs, $7,154,000 above 

the request and $1,680,000 above the enacted level. This total includes $14,770,000 for individual heritage areas and $119,000 for 

administration. The Committee recommends the following distribution of funds for each heritage area:

Project Amount 

America’s Agricultural Heritage Partnership (Silos and Smokestacks) ................................................................................................. $700,000 

Augusta Canal National Heritage Area ............................................... 600,000 

Automobile National Heritage Area ..................................................... 700,000 

Cache La Poudre River Corridor .......................................................... 50,000 

Cane River National Heritage Area ..................................................... 800,000 

Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor ............................. 900,000 

Erie Canalway National Corridor ........................................................ 600,000 

Essex National Heritage Area .............................................................. 1,000,000 

Hudson River Valley National Heritage Area ..................................... 1,000,000 

Illinois and Michigan Canal National Heritage Corridor ................... 600,000 

John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley National Heritage Center 800,000 

Lackawanna Valley National Heritage Area ....................................... 600,000 

National Coal Heritage ......................................................................... 210,000 

Ohio and Erie Canal National Heritage Corridor ............................... 1,000,000 

Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Center 800,000 

Rivers of Steel National Heritage Area ............................................... 1,000,000 

Schuykill River Valley National Heritage Area .................................. 500,000 

Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District ............... 500,000 

South Carolina National Heritage Corridor ........................................ 1,000,000 

Tennessee Civil War Heritage Area ..................................................... 210,000 

Wheeling National Heritage Area ........................................................ 800,000 

Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area .............................................. 400,000 

Project total ................................................................................. $14,770,000

Statutory or contractual aid.—The Committee recommends 

$4,939,000 for statutory or contractual aid, an increase of $802,000 

above the budget request and a reduction of $12,066,000 below the 

enacted level. 

50

URBAN PARK AND RECREATION FUND

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $30,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 300,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 30,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 29,700,000

The Committee has included $30,000,000 for the Urban Park and 

Recreation Fund, an increase of $29,700,000 above the request and 

the same as the enacted level. This program is funded under the 

conservation spending category. 

HISTORIC PRESERVATION FUND

The Historic Preservation Fund supports the State historic preservation offices to perform a variety of functions, including: State 

management and administration of existing grant obligations, review and advice on Federal projects and actions, determinations, 

and nominations to the National Register, Tax Act certifications, 

and technical preservation services. The States also review properties within States to develop data for planning use.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $74,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 67,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 76,500,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +2,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +9,500,000

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

51


Insert offset folio 09 HR564.009
52

The Committee recommends $76,500,000 for historic preserva- tion, an increase of $9,500,000 above the budget request and 

$2,000,000 above the enacted level. 

The total amount provides $40,000,000 for the State historic preservation offices, $4,000,000 for tribal grants, $30,000,000 for 

the Save America’s Treasures program and $2,500,000 for a grant 

to the National Trust for Historic Preservation to assist in the perpetual care and maintenance of historic sites of the National Trust. 

The Committee intends that the grant funds will be made available 

under the following terms and conditions. 

1. The full amount granted to the National Trust is to be deposited into a permanently restricted Historic Sites Fund account in 

the same manner as other National Trust endowment funds. Any 

income attributable to the grant will be added to the Historic Sites 

Fund endowment account, and will be made available for authorized grant purposes. 

2. The National Trust will make distributions from the amounts 

deposited in the endowment fund account for the care and maintenance of National Trust Historic Sites, in amounts consistent with 

its regularly established spending rate. 

3. In accordance with established National Trust policy, distributions from the National Trust Historic Sites Fund account will be 

matched as expended, dollar for dollar, with non-Federal funds 

raised for the care and maintenance of National Trust Historic 

Sites. Consequently, no further match requirement will be required 

for the grant. Work carried out by the National Trust under the 

grant will be in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s 

Standards for the Treatment of Historic Places. 

4. The National Trust will maintain adequate records and accounts relating to all financial transactions of, and distributions 

from, the National Historic Sites endowment account, and will 

make such records available for audit and inspection by the National Park Service and the Comptroller General for a period of five 

years following the date of the grant. 

The Committee has accepted the Administration’s bill language 

change regarding eligibility of projects under the Save America’s 

Treasures program. 

The Historic Preservation Fund is funded under the conservation 

spending category. 

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $387,668,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 322,384,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 325,186,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥62,482,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +2,802,000

The Committee recommends $335,186,000 for construction, an 

increase of $12,802,000 above the budget request and $52,482,000 

below the enacted level. 

The Committee recommends the following distribution of funds:

Project Amount 

Acadia NP, ME (rehabilitation) ............................................................ $3,351,000 

Acadia NP, ME (utilities upgrade) ....................................................... 5,171,000 

Alice Ferguson Foundation, MD (rehabilitation) ................................ 400,000 

Apostle Islands NL, WI (lighthouse) .................................................... 1,600,000 

Apostle Islands NL, WI (utility system) .............................................. 1,030,000 

53

Project Amount 

Badlands NP, SD ................................................................................... 3,842,000 

Bent’s Old Fort NHS, CO ...................................................................... 1,325,000 

Big Bend NP, TX (Chisos Basin Campground) ................................... 464,000 

Big Bend NP, TX (rehabilitation) ......................................................... 246,000 

Big Bend NP, TX (sprinkler system) .................................................... 673,000 

Big Cypress National Preserve, FL ...................................................... 2,000,000 

Big South Fork National River & Rec Area, KY/TN (upgrade exhibits) ........................................................................................................ 400,000 

Blue Ridge Parkway, NC ...................................................................... 1,624,000 

Canaveral NS, FL .................................................................................. 1,600,000 

Cape Cod NS, MA (Highland’s Center) ................................................ 1,725,000 

Cane & Karst, NM ................................................................................. 2,000,000 

Colonial NHP, VA .................................................................................. 4,221,000 

Craters of the Moon NM, ID ................................................................. 1,283,000 

Cumberland Gap NHP, KY ................................................................... 5,583,000 

Cumberland Island NS, GA (St. Mary’s) ............................................. 2,720,000 

Cumberland Island NS, GA (Plum Orchard) ...................................... 442,000 

Cuyahoga NP, OH ................................................................................. 3,000,000 

Death Valley NP, CA (rehabilitation) .................................................. 2,007,000 

Death Valley NP, CA (Scotty’s Castle) ................................................ 547,000 

Denali NP, AK ....................................................................................... 3,171,000 

Eleanor Roosevelt NHS, NY ................................................................. 300,000 

Everglades NP, FL (waste treatment) ................................................. 4,594,000 

Everglades NP, FL (water system) ...................................................... 13,295,000 

Fort Stanwix NM, NY ........................................................................... 3,239,000 

Fredericksburg & Spotsylvania NMP, VA ........................................... 2,250,000 

Gateway NRA, NY ................................................................................. 3,299,000 

General Grant NM, NY ......................................................................... 1,840,000 

George Washington Carver NM, MO ................................................... 300,000 

George Washington Memorial Parkway, VA (Arlington Boathouse, 

EA) ....................................................................................................... 600,000 

George Washington Memorial Parkway, VA (Arlington House) ........ 616,000 

George Washington Memorial Parkway, VA (complete EA, Mt. 

Vernon Trail) ...................................................................................... 250,000 

George Washington Memorial Parkway/Mt. Vernon Trail, VA ......... 200,000 

Gettysburg NMP, PA (conservation work) .......................................... 2,500,000 

Glacier NP, MT ...................................................................................... 1,500,000 

Golden Gate NRA, CA (Alcatraz barracks) ......................................... 1,210,000 

Golden Gate NRA, CA (building 640) .................................................. 600,000 

Golden Gate NRA, CA (Cliff House) .................................................... 1,914,000 

Great Sand Dunes, CO .......................................................................... 4,424,000 

Homestead NHS, NE ............................................................................. 300,000 

Independence NHP, PA ......................................................................... 4,923,000 

Indiana Dunes NHP, IN ........................................................................ 2,389,000 

Jean Lafitte NHP, LA (Chalmette failing drainage & Barataria exhibits) .................................................................................................. 500,000 

John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley NHA ................................... 1,000,000 

Lincoln Library, IL ................................................................................ 10,000,000 

Mammoth Cave NP, KY ........................................................................ 555,000 

Manassas NBP, VA ............................................................................... 1,493,000 

Mississippi National River & Recreation Area, MN (St. Anthony 

Center exhibits) .................................................................................. 1,000,000 

Mississippi National River & Recreation Area, MN (Twin Cities) .... 750,000 

Morristown NHS, NJ ............................................................................. 3,200,000 

Mt. Rainier NP, WA .............................................................................. 4,400,000 

Mt. Rainier NP, WA (Guide House) ..................................................... 244,000 

Mt. Rainier NP, WA (rehabilitate electrical system) .......................... 2,701,000 

National Capital Parks-Central, DC (Lincoln Memorial preservation) ..................................................................................................... 5,192,000 

National Capital Parks-Central, DC (Lincoln Memorial security) .... 6,183,000 

National Underground Railroad Freedom Center, OH ...................... 6,100,000 

Olympic NP, WA .................................................................................... 21,781,000 

Oregon Caves NM, OR .......................................................................... 1,044,000 

Rocky Mountain NP, CO ....................................................................... 2,335,000 

Saratoga NHP, NY (exhibits) ................................................................ 300,000 

Stones River NB, TN (trails) ................................................................ 500,000 

SW Pennsylvania Heritage Commission, PA ...................................... 3,000,000 

Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve, KS ............................................. 2,891,000 

54

Project Amount 

Tuskegee Airmen NHS, AL (oral histories) ......................................... 500,000 

Ulysses S. Grant NHS, MO .................................................................. 1,994,000 

USS Arizona Memorial, HI ................................................................... 1,157,000 

Washita NB, OK .................................................................................... 3,500,000 

White House, DC ................................................................................... 9,582,000 

Wind Cave NP, SD ................................................................................ 2,172,000 

Yellowstone NP, WY (Old Faithful Inn) .............................................. 5,743,000 

Yellowstone NP, WY (rehabilitation) ................................................... 6,396,000 

Yellowstone NP, WY (upgrade fire protection) .................................... 757,000 

Project total ................................................................................. 207,938,000 

Emergency/unscheduled ........................................................................ 3,500,000 

Housing replacement ............................................................................. 12,500,000 

Dam safety ............................................................................................. 2,700,000 

Equipment replacement ........................................................................ 31,960,000 

Construction planning ........................................................................... 25,400,000 

Construction Program Management .................................................... 27,292,000 

General Management Plans ................................................................. 13,896,000 

Total Construction ...................................................................... 325,186,000

The Committee has included an additional $10,000,000, as proposed in the budget request, to enhance the capacity of the Service 

to execute the capital infrastructure programs that contribute to 

reducing the deferred maintenance backlog. Significant funding increases have been provided by this Committee over the last six 

years, in line item construction, repair and rehabilitation, and the 

fee demonstration program. The Committee realizes that additional 

capacity is needed in the Service to keep these projects moving towards completion, including project specifications, compliance, and 

contract award and modification.

The Service should note that the Committee approved a 

$3,500,000 reprogramming request in fiscal year 1999 and provided 

additional funds and flexibility in the construction account over the 

past several years to respond to the additional workload. Given 

that support provided and considering the budget constraints facing this bill, the Service is expected to resolve its problems with 

unobligated balances. The Service should not ask for additional 

funds in the near future for this purpose. 

In addition, the Committee directs that the regions not use these 

funds exclusively to hire permanent staff. As much as possible, the 

funds are to be used to hire contractual assistance. The Committee 

expects to be informed before any new staff is hired using these 

funds. None of the funds provided are to be used for planners, as 

the Committee is concerned that additional planners tend to result 

in more new projects, rather than progress towards reducing the 

backlog of maintenance. 

None of the funds are to be used to conduct construction supervision in-house, consistent with the program guidelines used for 

the Denver Service Center. In-house design is also subject to the 

same program guidelines as the Denver Service Center. Staff, 

whether federal or contract, funded with these monies are to be 

used exclusively in the park construction program. 

None of these funds are to be allocated until the Service presents 

the Committee with a plan detailing how the funds will be used 

and allocated. The plan must address how the Service will address 

fluctuating workloads associated with project work. The Committee 

does not intend that any of these funds be used to pay expenses 

associated with existing staff—all of these dollars are intended to 

55

enhance and expand capacity beyond existing levels. The Committee expects a plan each fiscal year on how these funds are to 

be allocated. Any change to these annual plans must be approved 

by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriation. 

The Service is directed to itemize by park and project how construction planning dollars will be allocated in the annual budget 

justifications. The Committee expects a report by December 1, 

2002, providing this information for fiscal year 2003. While the 

Committee will consider a modest contingency allocation for unexpected planning needs, the majority of the funds are to be associated with specific projects. The Committee should be notified about 

any major change in the scope of a project. 

Bill language has been included under this account which limits 

the Denver Service Center staff, funded by the Construction Program Management and Operations Activity, to 160 full time equivalent employees including all full time and part time personnel and 

employees detailed to the Center or working on Center related 

projects. This is consistent with the National Academy of Public 

Administration report. The Committee understands that the Service Center is under that capacity at this time. 

Bill language is also included, which permits the transfer of $2,000,000 to the City of Carlsbad, New Mexico for the construction 

of the National Cave and Karst Research Institute to be operated 

and constructed in accordance with the provisions in Public Law 

105–325. The Committee understands that the Service enthusiastically supports the construction of this cost shared center, which 

will fulfill an important scientific research need. 

Bill language is also included, which requires Committee approval of spending for any new large facility including visitor centers, educational or interpretive centers, curatorial or administrative facilities with a total cost in excess of $5,000,000. This provision also applies to partnership and fee demonstration projects. The Committee has provided $400,000 to be matched with nonfederal funds for the Alice Ferguson Foundation for backlog maintenance needs; $1,600,000 to complete lighthouse repairs at Apostle 

Islands NL and $464,000 in planning funds to rehabilitate the 

Chisos Basin Campgrounds at Big Bend NP. In addition, $400,000 

in planning funds is provided to upgrade exhibits at Big South 

Fork National River and Recreation Area in Kentucky. 

Also provided is $1,600,000 to complete the rehabilitation of two 

historic structures at Canaveral NS; $2,000,000 for the construction of the Cave and Karst Center; $1,725,000 which completes the 

federal share of the Highlands Center at Cape Cod NS; $2,270,000 

to complete the St. Mary’s Center at Cumberland Island NS and 

$442,000 for continuing restoration at the historic Plum Orchard. 

The Committee has included $3,000,000 for rehabilitation work 

at Cuyahoga National Park; $547,000 in planning funds for Scotty’s 

Castle at Death Valley NP; $300,000 in planning funds for improvements to the historic structural and cultural landscapes at Eleanor Roosevelt National Historic Site. None of these funds are to 

be used to plan for, construct, or improve facilities used by park 

partners. Such improvements should be funded by non-federal 

sources. 

Planning funds in the amount of $300,000 each are provided to 

both the George Washington Carver NM and Homestead NHS. 

56

These funds may not be expended until the Service presents a 

more detailed plan to the Committee on how these funds will be 

spent. The following funds are provided to the George Washington 

Memorial Parkway—$600,000 to complete the environmental assessment associated with the Arlington boathouse proposal, 

$250,000 to complete assessments for the Mt Vernon Trail, and 

$200,000 for improvements to the parkway. Also included is $2,500,000 to complete conservation work at Gettysburg NMP. In addition, $600,000 is to complete construction 

planning, including design documents and construction drawings, 

for the proposed museum of Japanese-American history at Presidio 

Building 640. In accordance with this public/private partnership, 

this completes the Federal contribution. All funding for actual construction of this facility is to be raised through non-federal sources. The Committee has included $500,000 for failing drainage problems at Chalmette Battlefield and for exhibits at the Barataria 

unit, both located within the Jean Lafitte NHP in Louisiana; 

$1,000,000 for the John H. Chafee Blackstone River Valley NHA 

and $10,000,000 for the Lincoln Library. Also included is 

$1,000,000 for exhibits at St. Anthony’s Center, which is part of the 

Mississippi National River & Recreation Area in Minnesota. The Committee has included $750,000 in the planning portion of 

the Service’s construction budget for the National Park Service to 

lead a public planning process associated with disposition of the 

former Twin Cities Bureau of Mines Research Center. After 

lengthy discussions with the Department of the Interior, the Metropolitan Airports’ Commission decided against acquiring the Center. 

The Committee is informed that the Department of the Interior has 

concluded that reuse of the Center as an office complex for its bureaus and offices is not economically viable. The Committee agrees 

with this conclusion and with the decision of the Department to examine other options, including returning the site to natural conditions. 

The Committee understands that while the responsibility for the 

site rests with the Secretary of the Interior, the National Park 

Service participated extensively and effectively in prior public efforts to determine the potential future uses of the site. The funds 

provided will allow the Park Service to oversee the necessary studies and reviews associated with the potential disposal of Federal 

property. The Service should use the funds provided to obtain the 

necessary assistance for the studies and reviews, including contracting for services as appropriate. 

Other Department of the Interior bureaus, including the U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, should provide such assistance as is necessary to facilitate the Service’s accomplishment of this work. The 

Committee does not intend for the Service’s oversight of this process to disrupt or interfere with the ongoing operations at the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area (MNRRA), and thus 

provides the resources necessary to accomplish this workload. 

While the Park Service is being asked to coordinate the process, 

it is imperative that other public interests, including the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service and local and state governments participate in 

the public review and comment periods. By requesting Park Service 

to lead this process, it is not the Committee’s intention that the 

site be transferred to the MNRRA. The Committee understands 

57

that this option is inconsistent with MNRRA’s comprehensive management plan. The Committee has provided $3,200,000 to complete the federal 

share of rehabilitation work at Morristown NHS. Also included is 

$6,100,000 for the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center 

in Ohio. This completes the federal share of this project. The Committee also recommends $300,000 for exhibits at Saratoga NHP in New York; $500,000 for Stones River NB to plan for 

a tour route and pedestrian trail; $3,000,000 to continue work at 

the SW Pennsylvania Heritage Commission in Pennsylvania; and 

$500,000 to continue oral histories of the Tuskegee Airmen. The Committee has included $3,500,000 for the Washita National 

Battlefield. This completes the federal share of this project. This facility will also house the Black Kettle National Grassland office, a 

unit of the Forest Service. An additional $750,000 for the Forest 

Service portion of this project is included in the Forest Service capital improvement and maintenance account. The Committee expects the Park Service to make appropriate and suitable space 

available to the Forest Service to enable it to provide information, 

including historical and current program orientation. The Forest 

Service should not be required to pay more than $20,000 per year 

for routine maintenance and basic utilities, an amount slightly 

higher than its current expenses. 

The Committee expects that interagency collaboration on facilities, as well as cultural and natural resource protection and use, 

will result in greater long-term efficiency and better service to the 

public. To facilitate this collaboration, all future personnel placements by either agency at these sites should be considered for maximum interagency staffing opportunities. 

Within the amount provided for equipment replacement, $350,000 is earmarked for two replacement vessels at Apostle Island NL in Wisconsin. 

Of the total amount provided for construction, $53,736,000 is 

funded under the conservation spending category. 

LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND

(RESCISSION)

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. ¥$30,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... ¥30,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... ¥30,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends the rescission of $30,000,000 in the 

annual contract authority provided by the 16 U.S.C. 4601–10a. 

This authority has not been used in years, and there are no plans 

to use it in fiscal year 2003. 

LAND ACQUISITION AND STATE ASSISTANCE

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $274,117,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 286,057,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 253,099,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥21,018,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ ¥32,958,000 

58

The Committee recommends $253,099,000 for land acquisition and State assistance, a decrease of $32,958,000 below the budget 

request and $21,018,000 below the enacted level. This amount includes $79,099,000 for line item projects, $12,000,000 for acquisition management, $4,000,000 for emergencies and hardships and 

$4,000,000 for inholdings. Also included is $154,000,000 for the 

stateside program including $4,000,000 for administration. The 

Committee has retained the current allocation formula for stateside 

grants. 

The Committee recommends the following distribution of funds:

Committee 

Area and State recommendation 

Big Thicket Preserve (TX) ..................................................................... $3,000,000 

Blue Ridge Parkway (NC/VA) ............................................................... 399,000 

Chickamauga/Chattanooga NMP (TN) ................................................ 1,030,000 

Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area (NJ/PA) .................. 5,000,000 

Ebey’s Landing National Historical Reserve (WA) ............................. 1,100,000 

Fredricksburg and Spotsylvania County Battlefields Memorial (VA) 1,100,000 

Golden Gate NRA (Picardo Ranch) (CA) ............................................. 2,500,000 

Great Sand Dunes National Monument and Preserve (CO) .............. 7,000,000 

Gulf Islands National Seashore (MS) .................................................. 4,000,000 

Hawai’i Volcanoes National Park (HI) ................................................. 5,000,000 

Ice Age Trail (WI) .................................................................................. 3,000,000 

Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore (IN) ............................................. 1,000,000 

Lake Mead National Recreation Area (NV) ......................................... 3,500,000 

Little Rock Central High School National Historic Site (AR) ............ 130,000 

Moccasin Bend National Park (TN) ..................................................... 1,300,000 

Obed National Wild and Scenic River (TN) ......................................... 1,500,000 

Pinnacles National Monument (CA) .................................................... 1,000,000 

Piscataway Park (MD) .......................................................................... 500,000 

Point Reyes National Seashore (CA) .................................................... 1,500,000 

Prince William Forest Park (VA) ......................................................... 700,000 

Richmond National Battlefield Park (VA) ........................................... 2,000,000 

Saguaro National Park (AZ) ................................................................. 2,320,000 

Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area (CA) ................. 2,500,000 

Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Nat’l Historic District (VA) ............. 2,000,000 

Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore (MI) .................................. 1,000,000 

South Florida Restoration (grant to State of Florida) ........................ 19,500,000 

Timucuan Ecological and Historic Preserve (FL) ................................ 1,320,000 

Valley Forge National Historical Park (PA) ........................................ 2,000,000 

Virgin Islands National Park—Salt River (VI) ................................... 1,500,000 

Wrangell-St. Elias National Park and Preserve (AK) ........................ 700,000 

Subtotal: Federal Acquisition projects ...................................... 79,099,000 

Acquisition Management ....................................................................... 12,000,000 

Emergencies/Hardships ......................................................................... 4,000,000 

Inholdings/Exchanges ............................................................................ 4,000,000 

Stateside Grants .................................................................................... 150,000,000 

Stateside Administration ...................................................................... 4,000,000 

Total ............................................................................................. 253,099,000

Funds provided for Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation 

Area should be matched with non-Federal monies. This means new 

land or new dollars dedicated to protection of park lands within the 

recreation area’s boundaries. By June 30th of each year, the Service should certify the level of non-Federal contributions to land acquisition at this site. The Service is encouraged to review non-Federal appraisals in certifying the non-Federal contribution. 

Bill language is included under this account directing the expeditious completion of a flood protection system for the 8.5 Square 

Mile Area component of the Modified Water Deliveries Project. This 

project is critical to restoring more natural water flows to Everglades National Park and future restoration efforts recently authorized by Congress. The language makes clear that Congress intends 

59

the Army Corps of Engineers, in cooperation with the Department 

of the Interior, to implement a flood protection system known as 

‘‘alternative 6D’’ which combines both land acquisition within the 

8.5 Square Mile Area and construction of an interior levee and 

seepage canal to provide the necessary flood protection to the 8.5 

Square Mile Area. 

The land acquisition program is funded under the conservation 

spending category. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

Bill language is provided that will allow the Park Service to collect and accumulate funds collected from concessionaire and other 

private entities for utility services to be used to make repairs to 

utility systems. Current authority does not allow the accumulation 

of funds beyond the fiscal year in which they are collected.

In addition, bill language is provided that will allow the Park 

Service to benefit from partnership projects involving State, local 

or tribal governments. The Service is currently precluded from entering into reimbursable agreements with State and local governments without receiving the funds in advance of the work being 

performed. 

UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

The United States Geological Survey was established by an act 

of Congress on March 3, 1879 to provide a permanent Federal 

agency to conduct the systematic and scientific ‘‘classification of the 

public lands, and examination of the geological structure, mineral 

resources, and products of the National domain’’. The USGS is the 

Federal Government’s largest earth-science research agency, the 

Nation’s largest civilian mapmaking agency, and the primary 

source of data on the Nation’s surface and ground water resources. 

Its activities include conducting detailed assessments of the energy 

and mineral potential of the Nation’s land and offshore areas; investigating and issuing warnings of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, landslides, and other geologic and hydrologic hazards; research on the geologic structure of the Nation; studies of the geologic features, structure, processes, and history of other planets of 

our solar system; topographic surveys of the Nation and preparation of topographic and thematic maps and related cartographic 

products; development and production of digital cartographic data 

bases and products; collection on a routine basis of data on the 

quantity, quality, and use of surface and ground water; research in 

hydraulics and hydrology; the coordination of all Federal water 

data acquisition; the scientific understanding and technologies 

needed to support the sound management and conservation of our 

Nation’s biological resources; and the application of remotely 

sensed data to the development of new cartographic, geologic, and 

hydrologic research techniques for natural resources planning and 

management. 

60

SURVEYS, INVESTIGATIONS, AND RESEARCH

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $914,002,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 867,338,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 928,405,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +14,403,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +61,067,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

61


Insert offset folio 010 HR564.010
62


Insert offset folio 011 HR564.011
63

The Committee recommends $928,405,000 for surveys, investigations, and research, an increase of $61,067,000 above the budget 

request and $14,403,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. 

For the third year in a row the Committee has restored a number of high-priority research programs that were proposed for reduction or elimination by the Office of Management and Budget 

during the budget process. Officials at the Office of Management 

and Budget seemingly believe that the Department of the Interior 

no longer needs science on which to base natural resource policy 

decisions. This is not the position of the Congress as articulated in 

previous Interior bills, nor is it the position of the National Academy of Sciences which has provided recommendations on a program by program basis detailing the need to expand not eliminate 

the very programs that the Office of Management and Budget has 

targeted as unnecessary. The Committee strongly urges the Department and OMB to continue to fund these critical science programs in the base budget in future years. 

National mapping program.—The Committee recommends 

$135,077,000 for the national mapping program, $5,783,000 above 

the budget request and $1,800,000 above the 2002 enacted level including increases above the 2002 level of $900,000 for fixed costs, 

and $1,000,000 for energy assessments, and a decrease of $100,000 

for travel. The America View program is maintained at the enacted 

level of $3,000,000. 

The Committee understands that the U.S. Geological Survey has 

embarked on a decade-long effort to establish a digital database 

known as the National Map, which will update existing geographical infrastructure information. This project will replace over 

55,000 existing paper topographical maps that are, on average, 23 

years old. These maps, which cover both the natural and the built 

environment and the associated digital data, represent our most 

extensive geographic data infrastructure. This critical asset is becoming increasingly outdated as the demand for this capability is 

growing. January 2001 marked the beginning of a major USGS effort to transform the current paper series into a seamless, integrated, and on-line database known as the National Map. This 

strategic project requires extensive partnerships with State and 

local governments, other Federal agencies, non-governmental organizations, universities, and the private sector. The Committee understands that these alliances are being forged to construct the National Map. While portions of this digital infrastructure will be provided through these partnerships based on common standards and 

definitions, the vast majority of these spatial data will need to be 

provided by the Survey and other Federal agencies. 

Digital spatial data are essential to almost all sectors of the national economy. The private sector needs current and accurate digital geographic data, which will be provided by the National Map 

Program. Examples include: 1) road and highway data used for 

fleet vehicle routing by trucking companies, home delivery by retailers, and location-based services by restaurants; 2) digital elevation data for cellular telephone tower siting, airline and general 

aviation flight path planning, brush and forest fire spread modeling 

for insurance companies; 3) topographic data for private utility 

power line and pipeline maintenance, planning and routing; and 4) 

64

detailed map data for mining and energy exploration and extraction. 

The benefits of updated digital geographic data for use in geographic information systems and the projected cost savings merit 

this project being a high priority within the Department. The 

United Kingdom realized great savings from investments in modernized digital mapping infrastructure. The return on investment 

from improvements in access to, and use of, digital geographic data 

were in the neighborhood of $10 to $15 for every dollar invested. 

This capability can also function as a baseline for homeland security efforts as we seek to protect our critical infrastructure. The development of these digital products will improve performance, 

lower costs, and reduce the redundancy of geographic development 

by different agencies and levels of government. It will vastly improve citizen access to current geographic information and will finally unleash the integrating power of digital maps and information systems. The Committee strongly encourages the Administration to make completing and maintaining the National Map a high 

priority. 

Geologic hazards, resources and processes.—The Committee recommends $234,692,000 for geologic hazards, resources, and processes, $10,036,000 above the budget request and $1,882,000 above 

the 2002 level, including increases above the 2002 level of 

$1,930,000 for fixed costs, $2,000,000 for the coastal program, 

$500,000 for a scientific study into the impact of global dust events 

impacting the continental U.S., $1,200,000 for energy assessments, 

and $500,000 for geothermal assessments, and decreases of 

$324,000 for travel, $1,000,000 for monitoring equipment at 

Shemya Alaska, $450,000 for the Lake Mojave study, $500,000 for 

the North Carolina coastal erosion study, $1,500,000 for the Alaska 

minerals project, and $474,000 for the Yukon Flats study. 

Last year the Committee provided additional funding to begin 

the process of expanding the Survey’s coastal program consistent 

with the National Academy of Sciences recommendations for a comprehensive national program. The Committee has provided an additional $2,000,000, which will focus on moving the work in Tampa 

Bay from the pilot study phase to a fully operational project as part 

of the National coastal program. 

The Committee has maintained funding for light distancing and 

ranging (LIDAR) technology at the 2002 level to assist with the 

listing of Chinook Salmon and Summer Chum Salmon under the 

Endangered Species Act. 

The Committee has continued the Survey’s current programs 

that address water quality, land subsidence, and sea-level rise in 

coastal Louisiana. 

Water resources investigations.—The Committee recommends 

$209,678,000 for water resources investigations, $31,850,000 above 

the budget request and $3,852,000 above the 2002 enacted level, 

including increases above the 2002 level of $1,913,000 for fixed 

costs, $1,000,000 for the US/Mexican border initiative, $1,000,000 

for the Lake Pontchartrain study, $500,000 for the Potomac River 

basin ground water study, $580,000 for the long-term Estuary Assessment, and $400,000 for the Water Resources Research Institutes, and decreases of $348,000 for travel, $200,000 for the BerkVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
65

ley Pit, $299,000 for the Lake Champlain study, $499,000 for Hawaii ground water, and $195,000 for Noyes Slough. The Committee has provided an additional $1,000,000 to begin 

the process of developing a baseline water quality assessment of 

Lake Pontchartrain’s drainage basin. This study should be a collaborative effort with Southeastern Louisiana University. The Committee has provided an additional $580,000 for the 

Long-Term Estuary Assessment Group for a total program level of 

$1,000,000. These funds were provided so that the Survey can continue to participate in the university based consortium, called the 

Long-Term Estuary Assessment Group, for the purpose of developing assessment and monitoring systems relating to the Mississippi River. The Committee has provided an additional $500,000 to work 

with the Interstate Commission for the Potomac River Basin in developing a basin-wide groundwater assessment. 

Biological research.—The Committee recommends $170,414,000 

for biological research, $9,933,000 above the budget request and 

$4,025,000 above the 2002 enacted level including increases above 

the 2002 level of $2,704,000 for fixed costs of which $1,000,000 is 

for the cooperative research units to maintain the current staffing 

levels, $120,000 for Great Lakes vessel operations, $180,000 for two 

additional researchers at the Great Lakes Science Center, 

$1,000,000 for amphibian research, $500,000 for genetic research at 

the Wellsboro laboratory, $300,000 for inventorying and monitoring 

in the Cherokee National Forest, $500,000 for the NBII Tennessee 

node, $500,000 for the NBII New York node, and $400,000 to establish a new fish and wildlife cooperative research unit at the University of Nebraska, and decreases of $235,000 for travel, $748,000 

for the lead mining study in the Mark Twain National Forest, 

$180,000 for the Yukon River salmon study, $416,000 for Great 

Lakes vessel equipment, $300,000 for the pallid sturgeon study, 

$50,000 for the Tunison laboratory, and $250,000 for the terrapin 

study. 

The Committee has realigned the Gap Analysis Program by shifting $3,900,000 from the biological research and monitoring subactivity into biological information management and delivery subactivity. This realignment should result in management efficiencies 

for this high-priority program. 

Within the funds provided for biological research and monitoring, 

$2,700,000 is earmarked for chronic wasting disease research. The 

Committee directs the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture, working with the appropriate Interior Bureaus, to provide a coordinated, detailed, and comprehensive budget request as part of the 2004 budget. 

Science support.—The Committee recommends $87,369,000 for 

science support, $1,265,000 above the budget request and 

$1,114,000 above the 2002 enacted level, including an increase 

above the 2002 level of $1,217,000 for fixed costs and a decrease 

of $103,000 for travel. 

Facilities.—The Committee recommends $91,175,000 for facilities 

$2,200,000 above the budget request and $1,730,000 above the 

2002 enacted level including increases above the 2002 level of 

$3,979,000 for fixed costs, $1,200,000 for the Center for Coastal 

and Regional Studies in Florida for the purchase of scientific equipVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
66

ment, and $1,000,000 for the Tunison laboratory, and decreases of 

$1,700,000 for the Leetown expansion, $2,250,000 for one time construction funds for the Center for Coastal and Regional Studies in 

Florida, and $499,000 for the Wellsboro laboratory. 

Bill Language.—Language has been included under the Survey’s 

administrative provisions to allow the Survey to use cooperative 

agreements for research and data collection, and to allow the Survey to obtain space in cooperator facilities. The Committee has provided an additional $1,000,000 for the 

Tunison laboratory. These funds will be used to modernize this facility and to move forward with plans to use this facility to help 

in the effort to restore Atlantic salmon in Lake Ontario. 

The additional $1,200,000 provided to the Center for Coastal and 

Regional Studies will be applied to the costs associated with the 

Center’s expansion including the outfitting of specialized laboratories needed to support emerging geochemical, microbiological, 

and coral reef research. 

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 2003, MMS expects to 

collect and distribute about $4.2 billion from more than 78,000 active Federal and Indian leases. 

The MMS also manages the offshore energy and mineral resources on the Nation’s Outer Continental Shelf. To date, the OCS 

program has been focused primarily on oil and gas leasing. Over 

the past several years, MMS has been exploring the possible development of other marine mineral resources, especially sand and 

gravel. 

With the passage of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, MMS assumed 

increased responsibility for oil spill research, including the promotion of increased oil spill response capabilities, and for oil spill 

financial responsibility certifications of offshore platforms and pipelines. 

ROYALTY AND OFFSHORE MINERALS MANAGEMENT

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $150,667,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 164,222,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 164,721,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +14,054,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +499,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

67


Insert offset folio 012 HR564.012
68

The Committee recommends $164,721,000 for royalty and off- shore minerals management, $499,000 above the budget request 

and $14,054,000 above the 2002 enacted level. The increase to the 

budget request is for the Offshore Technology Research Center.

Bill Language.—Language has been included allowing MMS to 

retain a portion of the receipts under the royalty-in-kind program 

to pay for expenses related to the filling of the Strategic Petroleum 

Reserve. The Committee has continued the offshore oil and gas 

leasing moratorium under General Provisions, Department of the 

Interior. 

The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 

positive environmental benefits achieved by the military through 

the implementation of pulse technology as a major component of its 

battery management programs. The Committee believes that the 

Service would also benefit significantly and directly from the use 

of this technology to extend the life of vehicle batteries. These benefits include savings in battery replacement costs, reduction in 

overall maintenance costs for vehicles and ancillary equipment, and 

a resultant increase in safety for personnel. The Committee urges 

the Service to incorporate this technology in its ongoing purchase 

and maintenance programs for vehicles. The Service should report 

to the Committee by December 31, 2002, on its plans to comply 

with this direction. Beginning with the fiscal year 2004 budget request, the budget submission should include an accounting of the 

extent to which battery pulse technology is being employed and the 

savings expected and realized as a result of the use of this technology. 

OIL SPILL RESEARCH

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $6,105,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 6,105,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 6,105,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends $6,105,000 to be derived from the 

Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, to conduct oil spill research and financial responsibility and inspection activities associated with the 

Oil Pollution Act of 1990, Public Law 101–380. The Committee recommendation is equal to both the budget request and the fiscal 

year 2002 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 

69

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, 2002 .............................................................. $103,075,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 105,367,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 105,367,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +2,292,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

70


Insert offset folio 013 HR564.013
71

The Committee recommends $105,367,000 for Regulation and technology, including the use of $275,000 in civil penalty collections, which is equal to the request and $2,292,000 above the 2002 

level. The Committee rejects the proposal to increase the West Virginia allocation by $2,000,000 by reducing other primacy States by 

$1,000,000 and providing the entire $1,000,000 increase to West 

Virginia. The Committee notes that in July, 2000, West Virginia 

received a special Federal appropriation of $9,800,000 that is not 

yet fully expended. Until that time, it is unfair and inappropriate 

to penalize other States for problems in West Virginia. Accordingly, 

the Committee directs that the increase for regulatory grants be 

distributed to all States in the normal fashion recognizing that in 

recent years funding for this program has not kept up with inflation. The OSM has authority to make regulatory grant adjustments 

as needed. 

ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION FUND

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $203,455,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 174,035,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 184,745,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥18,710,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +10,710,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

72


Insert offset folio 014 HR564.014
73

The Committee recommends $184,745,000 for the Abandoned 

mine reclamation fund, a decrease of $18,710,000 below the 2002 

funding level and $10,710,000 above the request. The Committee 

recognizes the great amount of reclamation work that remains to 

be done and has increased funding above the request for this program. The Committee has continued the authority for the Appalachian Clean Streams Initiative at $10,000,000 and the emergency 

funding and authorities as in fiscal year 2002, and discontinued the 

special authority for Maryland. The Committee rejects proposals to: 

reduce Federal high priority projects, cut travel, and not fund fixed 

cost increases. The Committee encourages the OSM to work more 

closely with the Federal land managing agencies to fund and repair 

abandoned mine land problems that are risks to human safety and 

health, and the environment. Federal lands administered by the 

agencies funded in this bill have a huge backlog in this program 

area. 

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 one 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 117 day schools, 54 boarding schools, and 14 dormitories. Lastly, the Bureau administers more than 45 million 

acres of tribally owned land, and 10 million acres of individually 

owned land and over 309,000 acres of Federally owned land, which 

is held in trust status. 

OPERATION OF INDIAN PROGRAMS

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $1,799,809,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 1,837,110,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 1,859,064,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +59,255,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +21,954,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

74


Insert offset folio 015 HR564.015
75


Insert offset folio 016 HR564.016
76

The Committee recommends $1,859,064,000 for the operation of 

Indian programs, an increase of $21,954,000 above the budget request and $59,255,000 above the 2002 enacted level. The Committee agrees to all internal transfers by the BIA in the budget request. The Committee has provided increases above the enacted 

level to continue to fund the Administration’s request to fix the 

long-standing problems associated with management of the Indian 

trust funds. 

Tribal priority allocations.—The Committee recommends 

$780,654,000 for tribal priority allocations, an increase of 

$5,120,000 above the budget request and $28,498,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, including increases above the 2002 

level of $1,120,000 to provide base funding for six new tribes, 

$2,000,000 for the ISD fund, $4,000,000 for tribal courts, 

$2,054,000 for IIM account management, $585,000 for energy development on trust lands, $477,000 for natural resources related to 

energy development, $2,000,000 for agriculture for the development 

of management plans, $1,500,000 for forestry management, 

$8,125,000 for trust services for trust reform efforts, $5,443,000 for 

fixed costs, and $1,194,000 for internal transfers. 

Other recurring programs.—The Committee recommends 

$607,196,000 for other recurring programs, $11,004,000 above the 

budget request and $20,228,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted 

level, including increases above the 2002 level of $2,000,000 for 

ISEP formula funds, $3,000,000 for early childhood development, 

$2,000,000 for student transportation, $1,900,000 for facilities operations, $6,000,000 for administrative cost grants, $500,000 for the 

timber-fish-wildlife program, $1,000,000 for Chippewa/Ottawa treaty fisheries, and $6,193,000 for fixed costs, and decreases of 

$480,000 for irrigation O&M, $69,000 for the sea otter program, 

$803,000 for the Bering Sea Fisherman’s Association, $150,000 for 

the Nez Perce Tribe, $317,000 for the upper Columbia River tribes, 

$347,000 for the Chugach Regional Resources Commission, and 

$199,000 for internal transfers. 

The Committee recommends $524,817,000 for school operations, 

$20,802,000 above the 2002 enacted level. The Committee does not 

support the school privatization initiative. The Committee fully 

supports the President’s education reform efforts and agrees with 

the Department that tribes that want to manage their own schools 

should be given that opportunity. Limited funding in the past for 

basic needs such as facilities operations, student transportation, 

and administrative cost grants has served as a disincentive for 

tribes to take over the administration of BIA-operated schools. The 

Committee firmly believes that strengthening basic education funding and increasing support for administrative cost grants are the 

key incentives to improving local tribal operations of the BIA 

schools and enhancing the quality of education. Written testimony 

that the Committee received from the tribes and tribal organizations was overwhelmingly opposed to the proposed privatization 

initiative and pressed for a focus on expanding funding for existing 

education programs and implementing newly enacted education 

legislation. The Committee encourages the Department and the 

Bureau to consult with the tribes and to examine the BIA school 

system needs and new legislative requirements thoroughly in deVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
77

veloping its 2004 budget request to ensure that no Indian child is 

left behind. 

Non recurring programs.—The Committee recommends 

$70,824,000 for non recurring programs, $3,314,000 above the 

budget request and $1,974,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted 

level, including increases above the 2002 level of $650,000 for minerals and mining, $300,000 for water management planning and 

predevelopment for the Seminole tribe to address water quality 

programs as part of Everglades restoration efforts, $1,500,000 for 

real estate services, and $193,000 for fixed costs, and decreases of 

$500,000 for the Cherion Foundation, $500,000 for the Alaska fire 

program, $75,000 for the Washington ferry assessment, $400,000 

for the tribal guiding program, $1,700,000 for the distance learning 

project, $25,000 for irrigation drainage, $320,000 for unresolved 

hunting and fishing rights, $350,000 for Alaska legal services, and 

$747,000 for internal transfers. 

Within the $3,000,000 provided for the ‘‘Jobs in the Woods’’ initiative, $400,000 should continue to be used by the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission for the Wildstock Restoration Initiative. 

Central office operations.—The Committee recommends 

$70,035,000 for central office operation, $2,455,000 below the budget request and $11,929,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted 

level, including increases above the 2002 level of $5,700,000 for 

trust services as part of the bureaus trust reform efforts, 

$5,500,000 for information technology issues as part of trust reform, $500,000 for the branch of acknowledgment, $156,000 for 

fixed costs, and $74,000 for internal transfers, and a decrease of 

$1,000 for general administration. 

Regional office operations.—The Committee recommends 

$64,223,000 for regional office operations, the same as the budget 

request and $1,544,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, including increases above the 2002 enacted level of $1,000,000 for 

minerals and mining, $500,000 for the land title records office, 

$613,000 for fixed costs, and a decrease of $569,000 for internal 

transfers. 

Special programs and pooled overhead.—The Committee recommends $266,132,000 for special programs and pooled overhead, 

$4,971,000 above the budget request and $970,000 below the fiscal 

year 2002 enacted level including increases above the 2002 level of 

$3,000,000 for facilities operations, and $1,485,000 for fixed costs, 

and decreases of $500,000 for the Indian Arts and Craft Board, 

$100,000 for the Ponca tribe economic development plan, 

$1,000,000 for the Yuut Elitnauviat learning center, $1,000,000 for 

the aviation training program, $401,000 for intra-governmental 

transfers, $2,000,000 for employee displacement costs, and 

$454,000 for internal transfers. 

Bill Language.—Language is included under administrative provisions allowing the Bureau to contract for management, operations, and maintenance services for the San Carlos Irrigation 

Project. 

The Committee is aware of concerns that the Solicitor may not 

be providing the Indian Arts and Crafts Board with adequate legal 

representation and urges the Solicitor to provide appropriate legal 

representation for the Indian Arts and Crafts Board in enforcement 

of the Indian Arts and Crafts Act. 

78

The Committee once again takes note of two innovative programs 

underway by the Tohono O’odham Nation in Arizona. The Nation 

has developed a higher education services program to assist tribal 

members in identifying available funding sources for higher education, as well as preparatory course work. The Nation has also developed an employment assistance program to assist tribal members to find employment through direct employment assistance and 

vocational training. The Committee strongly encourages the Bureau to review favorably these programs as it develops the 2004 

budget. 

The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 

positive environmental benefits achieved by the military through 

the implementation of pulse technology as a major component of its 

battery management programs. The Committee believes that the 

Bureau would also benefit significantly and directly from the use 

of this technology to extend the life of vehicle batteries. These benefits include savings in battery replacement costs, reduction in 

overall maintenance costs for vehicles and ancillary equipment, and 

a resultant increase in safety for personnel. The Committee urges 

the Bureau to incorporate this technology in its ongoing purchase 

and maintenance programs for vehicles. The Bureau should report 

to the Committee by December 31, 2002, on its plans to comply 

with this direction. Beginning with the fiscal year 2004 budget request, the budget submission should include an accounting of the 

extent to which battery pulse technology is being employed and the 

savings expected and realized as a result of the use of this technology. 

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $357,132,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 345,252,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 345,252,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥11,800,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

79


Insert offset folio 017 HR564.017
80

The Committee recommends $345,252,000 for construction, the 

same as the budget request and 11,880,000 below the fiscal year 

2002 enacted level. 

Education.—The Committee recommends $292,717,000 for education construction, the same as the budget request and $214,000 

above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level including increases above 

the 2002 level of $2,576,000 for facilities improvement and repair 

and $214,000 for fixed costs, and a decrease of $2,576,000 for replacement school construction. The funding level for replacement 

school construction is sufficient to construct the following six 

schools: Santa Fe Indian School, NM; Kayenta Boarding School, 

AZ; Tiospa Zina Tribal School, SD; Wide Ruins Boarding School, 

AZ; Low Mountain Boarding school, AZ; and the St. Francis Indian 

School, SD. 

Within the funds provided for facilities improvement and repair, 

$918,000 is for the Ramah Navajo replacement dormitory. This 

funding level is sufficient to complete construction of this project. 

Public safety and justice.—The Committee recommends 

$5,046,000 for public safety and justice, the same as the budget request and $495,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, including an increase above the 2002 level of $5,000 for fixed costs and 

a decrease of $500,000 for fire protection. 

Resources management.—The Committee recommends 

$39,173,000 for resources management, the same as the budget request and $11,472,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, including increases above the 2002 level of $57,000 for fixed costs, 

and $701,000 for internal transfers for FERC activities, and a decrease of $12,230,000 for the Navajo irrigation project. 

General administration.—The Committee recommends 

$8,316,000 for general administration, the same as the budget request and $127,000 below the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, including an increase above the 2002 level of $73,000 for fixed costs and 

a decrease of $200,000 for construction program management. 

INDIAN LAND AND WATER CLAIM SETTLEMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS

PAYMENTS TO INDIANS

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $60,949,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 57,949,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 60,949,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +3,000,000 

The Committee recommends $60,949,000 for Indian land and 

water claim settlements and miscellaneous payments to Indians 

$3,000,000 above the budget request and the same as the 2002 enacted level. Funding includes $625,000 for White Earth, $250,000 

for Hoopa-Yurok, $24,728,000 for the Ute settlement, $142,000 for 

Pyramid Lake, $5,068,000 for Rocky Boys, $19,000,000 for the 

Schiviwtz Band of which $3,000,000 for land acquisition is funded 

under this account rather than the departmental management as 

proposed in the budget request, $3,136,000 for Santo Domingo 

Pueblo, and $8,000,000 for Colorado Ute. 

81

INDIAN GUARANTEED LOAN PROGRAM ACCOUNT

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $4,986,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 5,493,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 5,493,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +507,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends $5,493,000 for the Indian guaranteed loan program account the same as the budget request and 

$507,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. 

DEPARTMENTAL OFFICES

INSULAR AFFAIRS

ASSISTANCE TO TERRITORIES

The Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) was established on August 4, 

1995 through Secretarial Order No. 3191, which also abolished the 

former Office of Territorial and International Affairs. The OIA has 

important responsibilities to help the United States government 

fulfill its responsibilities to the four U.S. territories of Guam, 

American Samoa, 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.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $78,950,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 70,217,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 73,217,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 ............................................................................ ¥5,733,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... +3,000,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

82


Insert offset folio 018 HR564.018
83

The Committee recommends $73,217,000 for assistance to territories, $5,733,000 below the fiscal year 2002 level and $3,000,000 

above the budget request. 

Territorial Assistance.—The Committee recommends $22,397,000 

for territorial assistance, $5,733,000 below the fiscal year 2002 

level and $3,000,000 above the budget request. Increases to the 

budget request include $1,000,000 for court-mandated improvement 

projects in the U.S. Virgin Islands, $1,000,000 for compact impact 

aid to Guam, and $1,000,000 for the Prior Service Benefits Administration. Further instructions on this latter matter are under the 

Covenant grant heading below. 

The Committee approves the proposed staffing increase to administer the new Compact financial assistance program which, 

hopefully, will soon be established for the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands. The Committee 

encourages the Administration to consider establishing an interagency group on Insular affairs in order to more effectively coordinate the various efforts in government. The Committee encourages 

the Department to work diligently with the Marine Resources Pacific Consortium, coordinated by the University of Guam, to enhance management and preservation of coral reefs among the Pacific Islands of the CNMI, Guam, American Samoa, the Federated 

States of Micronesia, the Republic of Palau, and the Republic of the 

Marshall Islands. 

American Samoa.—The Committee recommends $23,100,000 for 

American Samoa as requested and enacted for 2002. The Committee continues to be concerned about fiscal conditions in American Samoa and encourages the Administration and the American 

Samoa government to complete and implement a financial reform 

package forthwith. 

Northern Mariana Islands/Covenant grants.—The Committee 

recommends $27,720,000 for CNMI covenant grants as requested 

and enacted in 2002. The Committee approves the proposed increase to CNMI impact aid and the reduction to the CNMI labor 

initiative now that other Federal agencies absorb the cost of their 

CNMI operations into their operating budgets. The Committee 

notes that the statutory earmark for CNMI construction for fiscal 

year 2003 is $5,420,000. The Committee directs that $10,000,000 

be allocated for CNMI construction grants, a $1,000,000 reduction 

from the budget request but an increase of $4,580,000 above the 

current statutory requirement. The Committee has included language authorizing $1,000,000 of Covenant grant funding to be used 

to continue payment of benefits under the prior service benefits 

program. In addition, the Committee has provided an additional 

$1,000,000 for the prior benefits program under the technical assistance program. The Department is directed to meet with representatives of the Prior Service Benefits Board of Directors to develop a proposal for future funding at a reduced level and to arrange for transfer of program administration to appropriate pension or social security systems in the freely associated states and 

the CNMI. 

Guam.—The Committee notes the $4,580,000 payment to Guam 

using Covenant grant funds and an additional $1,000,000 in technical assistance funding are to address the impact resulting from 

the implementation of the Compact of Free Association. 

84

COMPACT OF FREE ASSOCIATION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $23,245,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 20,745,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 21,045,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥2,200,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +300,000

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

85


Insert offset folio 019 HR564.019
86

The Committee recommends $21,045,000 for the compact of free association, $300,000 above the request and $2,200,000 below the 

2002 level. The Committee notes that this reduction is mandated 

in law now that the original 15 years of the compact financial assistance has lapsed. The Committee is generally pleased with the 

progress the governments have made concerning renegotiating the 

financial terms of the compacts of free association. The Committee 

expects the Department to continue to be involved in this process 

and to keep the Committee regularly apprised. The Committee 

strongly encourages all parties to complete the negotiation early 

this summer and complete a legislative and budget proposal by 

early fall, 2002. 

DEPARTMENTAL MANAGEMENT

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $69,946,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 78,596,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 72,533,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +2,587,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ ¥6,063,000

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

87


Insert offset folio 020 HR564.020
88

The Committee recommends $72,533,000 for departmental man- agement, a decrease of $6,063,000 below the budget request and 

$2,587,000 above the enacted level. The Committee has not provided $2,395,000 for milar window protection because substantial 

funds were provided in the emergency supplemental under the 

General Services Administration account for this purpose. 

The Committee is concerned about the lack of communications 

regarding key policy decisions and public announcements at the 

Department. The Committee has reduced the Department’s Congressional Affairs office and the Communications office by $200,000 

each. 

The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 

positive environmental benefits achieved by the military through 

the implementation of pulse technology as a major component of its 

battery management programs. The Committee believes that the 

Department of the Interior would also benefit significantly and directly from the use of this technology to extend the life of vehicle 

batteries. These benefits include savings in battery replacement 

costs, reduction in overall maintenance costs for vehicles and ancillary equipment, and a resultant increase in safety for personnel. 

The Committee urges the Department to incorporate this technology in its ongoing purchase and maintenance programs for vehicles. The Department should report to the Committee by December 

31, 2002, on its plans to comply with this direction. Beginning with 

the fiscal year 2004 budget request, the budget submission should 

include an accounting of the extent to which battery pulse technology is being employed and the savings expected and realized as 

a result of the use of this technology.

OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $45,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 47,773,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 47,473,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +2,473,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ ¥300,000

The Committee recommends $47,473,000 for the Office of the Solicitor, a decrease of $300,000 from the budget request and 

$2,473,000 above the enacted level. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $34,302,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 36,659,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 36,239,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +1,937,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ ¥420,000

The Committee recommends $36,239,000 for the Office of the Inspector General, a decrease of $420,000 below the budget request 

and $1,937,000 above the enacted level. 

The reduction provides the same rate of uncontrollable expenses 

as provided for other Interior bureaus. 

89

NATIONAL INDIAN GAMING COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 2,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 2,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +2,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $2,000,000 for the National Indian 

Gaming Commission the same as the budget request and 

$2,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL TRUSTEE FOR AMERICAN INDIANS

FEDERAL TRUST PROGRAMS

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $99,224,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... $151,027,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 141,277,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +42,053,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ ¥9,750,000

The Committee recommends $141,277,000 for the office of special trustee for American Indians, $9,750,000 below the budget request 

and $42,053,000 above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. 

Executive direction.—The Committee recommends $2,530,000 for 

executive direction, an increase above the 2002 level of $34,000 for 

fixed costs. 

Operations.—The Committee recommends $39,516,000 for oper- ations, including increases above the 2002 level of $15,767,000 for 

fixed costs, $4,848,000 for the office of trust fund management, and 

$2,400,000 for field operations. 

Litigation support and records.—The Committee recommends 

$3,129,000 for litigation support and records, including increases 

above the 2002 level of $80,000 for fixed costs, $200,000 for records 

operations, and $300,000 for litigation support. 

Program support services.—The Committee recommends 

$5,451,000 for program support services, including a program increase above the 2002 level of $1,226,000 and a decrease of 

$503,000 for fixed costs. 

Improvement initiatives.—The Committee recommends 

$90,651,000 for improvement initiatives, including increases above 

the 2002 level of $2,500,000 for OST data cleanup, $2,000,000 for 

BIA data cleanup, $4,000,000 for records management, $4,000,000 

for policies and procedures, $1,000,000 for risk management, 

$5,050,000 for trust improvement coordination, $1,975,000 for the 

three trust breaches, $7,500,000 for historical accounting, and 

$10,000,000 for trust net to address high-priority computer security 

problems, and decreases of $14,124,000 for fixed costs, $2,000,000 

for the probate cleanup, $2,000,000 for trust asset account management system, and $2,200,000 for training. 

Bill Language.—The Committee remains very concerned about 

the escalating costs associated with the Cobell v. Norton litigation 

and with the effect this litigation is having on the Department’s 

trust reform efforts. Therefore, the Committee has included a number of legislative provisions (under General Provisions, Department 

90

of the Interior) it believes are important in moving the trust reform 

process forward. 

The Committee has included a general provision to address the 

issue of releasing the Ernst and Young study, and has included legislative language in the Office of Special Trustee account to address 

the issue of an historical accounting. In the Fiscal Year 2002 Joint 

Explanatory Statement of the Committee of Conference, the managers reiterated their position that they will not appropriate hundreds of millions of dollars for a historical accounting whose outcome is unlikely to be successful. The Committee now believes that 

a transaction-by-transaction accounting for all accounts without regard to when the funds were deposited could cost as much as $1 

billion. The allocation of these funds would have a devastating effect on Indian country by siphoning scarce resources away from 

critical Indian programs. 

The Committee’s concern is reinforced by the opposition of plaintiffs in Cobell v. Norton to disclose the results of the Ernst and 

Young report on the historical accounting of the five named plaintiffs and their predecessors. Accordingly, the Committee has included a requirement for disclosure to the Committee of a summary 

of the Ernst and Young report. Congress provided nearly $20 million to conduct this accounting and the Committee believes that the 

results of this accounting will provide important information for determining whether this expenditure was a wise use of appropriated 

funds, and to serve as a benchmark to determine the extent to 

which future appropriations for this type of activity are warranted. 

The Committee has also included a provision limiting the historical accounting to a more defined period. By limiting the historical 

accounting, the Committee will focus its limited resources on a 

manageable group of accounts for which results can be produced 

within a reasonable period of time and at a more reasonable cost. 

By specifying the starting date for the accounting, it is the Committee’s intent that the balance in each account as of that date 

shall be accepted as correct for purposes of the accounting. This 

provision also includes language limiting, until further action by 

the Congress, any historical accounting beyond that described in 

the provision. 

Further accounting shall not proceed until the Committees on 

Appropriations and the relevant Committees of jurisdiction have 

had an opportunity to review the comprehensive plan now under 

development by the Department, the Ernst and Young report, and 

the results of the focused accounting funded in this bill. Such a review will provide the Congress the opportunity to consider options 

for further accounting or other legislative remedies. 

The Committee notes that the Special Master and the Court 

Monitor appointed by the Court to review various aspects of trust 

reform at the Department are receiving compensation for their activities that exceed those of the Chief Justice and the Vice President of the United States. The Committee believes that, by any 

measure, the current level of compensation is excessive. Therefore, 

given current fiscal and budgetary constraints, the Committee has 

included a general provision that caps the compensation for each 

of these Court Officers at no more than 200 percent of the highest 

Senior Executive Service rate of pay. For fiscal year 2003, that 

maximum amount is $276,400. 

91

With minor exceptions the current Special Trustee Advisory 

Board has been in place since the Board was first constituted, even 

though the Trust Reform Act established a nine member Board to 

be appointed by the Special Trustee for a period of two years. Recent events, including the EDS report, the decision to replace the 

High Level Implementation Plan with a new Strategic Plan, the 

Secretary’s proposal to create a new organizational structure to address trust reform, and the establishment of a new Office of Historical Trust Accounting, speak to the need for a new board with a 

new perspective and fresh ideas. In addition, the Committee remains concerned over the appearance of a conflict of interest having the named plaintiff in the Cobell v. Norton litigation on the Advisory Board. Therefore, the Committee has included a general provision requiring the appointment of a new advisory board. 

The Committee is very concerned that the ongoing Cobell v. Norton litigation is jeopardizing the ability of the Department of the 

Interior to successfully implement trust reform. The Committee 

finds it particularly troubling that almost every individual in a position of leadership has been subject to a contempt of court motion 

by the plaintiffs in the case. It is clear to the Committee that this 

legal strategy is resulting in some of the best people having to 

recuse themselves from working on trust reform, and it is becoming 

more difficult for the Department to hire talented people to take on 

the difficult responsibilities. If this situation continues unabated it 

will surely result in the inability of the Department to implement 

trust reform. To help ameliorate this extraordinary situation, the 

Committee has included a general provision that would help the 

employees in the Department pay for legal costs arising from this 

litigation. It is the Committee’s hope that this language will create 

sufficient incentives to allow the Department to continue to seek 

out the best and the brightest for this challenging work. 

INDIAN LAND CONSOLIDATION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $10,980,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 7,980,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 7,980,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥3,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends $7,980,000 for Indian land consolidation the same as the budget request and $3,000,000 below the 

fiscal year 2002 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 $54 

million in receipts in fiscal year 2002, with the vast majority to be 

used for the restoration of injured resources. The program works 

92

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 under the Departmental Offices heading because its 

functions relate to several different bureaus within the Department 

of the Interior.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $5,497,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 5,538,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 5,538,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +41,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends $5,538,000 for the natural resource 

damage assessment fund, which is equal to the budget request and 

$41,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. The Committee encourages the Service to use the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation 

for some of its restoration work under this program. The Foundation has a proven track record in establishing partnerships and 

leveraging Federal funds for habitat restoration. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

The Committee recommends continuing several provisions carried in previous bills as follows. Sections 101 and 102 provide for 

emergency transfer authority with the approval of the Secretary. 

Section 103 provides for warehouse and garage operations and for 

reimbursement for those services. Section 104 provides for vehicle 

and other services. Section 105 provides for uniform allowances. 

Section 106 provides for twelve-month contracts. Sections 107 

through 110 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 

in this report. Section 111 limits the investment of Federal funds 

by tribes and tribal organizations to obligations of the United 

States or obligations insured by the United States. Section 112 prohibits the National Park Service from reducing recreation fees for 

non-local travel through any park unit. Section 113 continues permitting the transfer of funds between the Bureau of Indian Affairs 

and the Office of Special Trustee for American Indians. 

Section 114 provides permanent authority to the Secretary of the 

Interior to negotiate and enter into agreements and leases with 

certain entities associated with Fort Baker. The language permits 

funds to be retained from leases and proceeds from agreements, for 

the preservation, restoration, operation, maintenance and interpretation of Fort Baker. The funds are available until expended. 

Section 115 continues a provision allowing the hiring of administrative law judges to address the Indian probate backlog. 

Section 116 permits the redistribution of tribal priority allocation 

and tribal base funds to alleviate funding inequities. 

Section 117 continues a provision requiring the allocation of Bureau of Indian Affairs postsecondary schools funds consistent with 

unmet needs. 

Section 118 continues a provision limiting the use of the Huron 

Cemetery in Kansas City to religious purposes.

93

Section 119 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 120 extends for one year a provision regarding the use 

of transportation fees under the National Parks Omnibus Management Act of 1998. 

Section 121 continues a provision authorizing a cooperative 

agreement with the Golden Gate National Parks Association. 

Section 122 continues a provision permitting the Bureau of Land 

Management to retain funds from the sale of seeds and seedlings. 

Section 123 continues a provision permitting the sale of improvements and equipment at the White River Oil Shale Mine in Utah 

and the retention and use of those funds by the Bureau of Land 

Management and the General Services Administration. 

Section 124 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 125 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 126 continues a provision prohibiting the closure of the 

underground lunchroom at Carlsbad Caverns NP, NM. 

Section 127 continues a provision preventing the demolition of a 

bridge between New Jersey and Ellis Island.

Section 128 continues a provision prohibiting the posting of signs 

at Canaveral National Seashore as clothing optional areas if it is 

inconsistent with county ordinance. 

Section 129 permits the use of funds for incidental expenses related to promoting the Centennial of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System. 

Section 130 authorizes the National Park Service to enter into a 

cooperative agreement with Capitol Concerts. 

Section 131 requires the Department of the Interior to provide a 

summary of the Ernst and Young report on the historical accounting of the named plaintiffs in Cobell v. Norton. 

Section 132 limits 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 133 requires the Special Trustee for American Indian to 

appointment new Advisory Board members. 

Section 134 allows the Secretary to pay private attorney fees for 

employees and former employees incurred in connection with 

Cobell v. Norton. 

Section 135 allows the Interior firefighting Bureaus to engage in 

firefighting activities on non-Federal lands. 

Section 136 extends the deadline for submission of reports and 

termination of the Commission to create a National Museum of African American History and Culture Plan for Action to September 

30, 2003. 

Section 137 makes funds appropriated in the Labor, Health and 

Human Services, Education and Related Agencies Appropriations 

Act for fiscal year 2002, for the National Museum of African AmerVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
94

ican History and Culture Plan for Action Presidential Commission, 

available until expended. 

Section 138 ensures that the Department of the Interior, with 

significant technical expertise and stewardship responsibilities for 

one-half of the remaining Everglades, is included as a full partner 

with the Army Corps and the State of Florida agencies in the interagency and interdisciplinary team known as ‘‘RECOVER’’. Under 

the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan recently authorized by Congress, RECOVER is responsible for assessing, evaluating and integrating the numerous projects that comprise the 

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan so that the goals and 

purposes of the Plan, including the restoration of the Everglades 

natural system, are achieved. Including the Department of the Interior as a full partner will ensure that Interior’s significant technical expertise is fully utilized and that the primary Federal interest in the Comprehensive Plan, the restoration of the Everglades, 

is achieved. 

Section 139 requires the Fish and Wildlife Service to mark 

hatchery salmon. 

Section 140 names the visitor center at the Bitter Lake National 

Wildlife Refuge in New Mexico the Joseph R. Skeen Visitor Center. 

Section 141 establishes a thirteen member Commission to study 

the effect of gaming on Indian country. 

TITLE II— RELATED AGENCIES 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

FOREST SERVICE

The U.S. Forest Service manages 192 million acres of public 

lands for multiple use Nationwide, including lands in 44 States and 

Puerto Rico. 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, 5 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. 

During the past two years the Congress has funded the national 

fire plan submitted by the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior and the governors. The Committee remains committed to the 

national fire plan and understands that this requires the long-term 

involvement of Federal, State and local governments and tribes, 

working with citizens and industries. The Committee has invested 

in a broad program which: (1) provides firefighting resources and 

personnel; (2) funds rehabilitation and restoration; (3) invests in 

active management to reduce wildfire risk by reducing hazardous 

fuels; (4) provides State, volunteer and community assistance and 

invests in research and development; and (5) requires continual 

and careful accountability to monitor performance. If appropriated 

funds are insufficient during emergency situations, other available 

funds may be used for fire suppression but the Administration 

95

must take action to replenish these funds so that the normal program of work of non-fire activities is not halted. The National Fire 

Plan is discussed in more detail under the wildland fire management account heading. 

FOREST AND RANGELAND RESEARCH

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, 2002 .............................................................. $241,304,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 242,798,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 252,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +10,696,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +9,202,000 

The Committee recommends $252,000,000 for forest and range- land research, $9,202,000 above the budget request and 

$10,696,000 above the 2002 funding level. The Committee rejects 

the proposed budget and allocations as they are poorly conceived 

and were not coordinated at all with key constituencies. The Committee’s recommended allocation does not make funding available 

for the program initiatives and redirections contained in the budget 

request. 

The Committee expects that future budget submissions will be 

responsive to recommendations in the recent National Research 

Council report, ‘‘National Capacity in Forestry Research’’, and 

input from the Secretary’s Forestry Research advisory council, the 

National Association of Professional Forestry Schools and Colleges, 

the State foresters, and industry and public user groups. The Committee also expects that future budgets will be better coordinated 

with other USDA and Department of the Interior research bureaus 

and be responsive to the national fire plan and other key agency 

efforts such as invasive species and long-term forest productivity, 

as well as areas of demonstrated Congressional support. The Committee also encourages the Forest Service to reevaluate the current 

budget structure and determine if the public might not be better 

served with explicit line items and associated outcomes as was the 

case in the past. 

The overall allocation includes $241,304,000, the same funding 

level as in 2002, plus an increase of $3,000,000 for the forest inventory and analysis (FIA) program, a $1,700,000 increase for the advanced housing research consortium which includes work at Mississippi State University and other universities, a total of $300,000 

for the International Arid Lands Consortium ($300,000 is also in 

State and private forestry for an agency-wide total of $600,000), a 

$500,000 increase for work on adelgids and other insects in the 

96

east, and a $500,000 increase for research on sudden oak death in 

the west. The remaining increase is for fixed costs, and included in 

the funds provided is $531,000 for anticipated additional costs to 

be incurred by the Pacific Northwest Research Station as a result 

of administrative services provided by region six of the Forest Service. The Committee is providing full funding at the 2002 level for 

previously designated Congressional priorities. These projects include, among others, the CROP effort on the Colville national forest, WA, National Agroforestry Center, NE, Bent Creek, NC, 

Coweeta Lab, NC, Olympic Natural Resource Center, WA, and 

urban forestry at Syracuse, NY and Davis, CA. 

The Committee directs that the Forest Service obtain approval 

from the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations before 

closing any research work unit or locations. 

The forest inventory and analysis (FIA) program within research is funded at the fiscal year 2002 level, $36,498,000, plus an additional $3,000,000 mentioned above. The Committee encourages the 

States to help cost-share the program. The Committee has also included FIA funding in other accounts. State and Private forestry 

includes $9,000,000 for cost-share efforts within the forest resource 

information and analysis activity ($4,004,000 above the request) 

and $2,810,000 within the forest health activities. The National forest system account includes $6,200,000 for FIA activities within the 

inventory and monitoring activity. The FIA total recommended 

funding is $57,508,000. This is more than double the appropriated 

funding provided in fiscal year 1998. 

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, 2002 .............................................................. $291,221,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 277,363,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 279,828,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥11,393,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +2,465,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

97


Insert offset folio 021 HR564.021
98

The Committee recommends $279,828,000 for State and private forestry, $2,465,000 above the budget request and $11,393,000 

below the 2002 funding level. This funding includes $133,133,000 

within the conservation spending category. 

Forest health management.—The Committee recommends 

$81,412,000 for forest health management, $32,000 above the request and $13,108,000 above the enacted. The Committee reiterates its concern with forest health in the broad sense and has 

added bill language to clarify that forest health activities may include treatments for invasive or noxious plants. The Committee expects the Forest Service to keep insect and disease risk maps upto-date and provide the Congress with updated maps as they become available. The Committee rejects the administration’s proposal for an emerging pest fund that came with unrealistic restrictions. Instead, the Committee has added this funding to the base 

program in order to fund fully imminent pest problems and the ongoing base program. This funding should fully fund the Slow-thespread gypsy moth program and provide additional resources for 

work to control and manage the Asian long-horned beetle in urban 

settings and adelgids in the east. Under the wildland fire management heading the Committee has added additional resources to 

help prevent outbreaks and restore forests affected by southern 

pine beetles, mountain bark beetles, sudden oak death, and other 

pests and pathogens.

Cooperative fire protection.—The Committee recommends 

$30,393,000 for cooperative fire protection in the State and private 

forestry account, $30,000 above the 2002 funding level and equal 

to the budget request for these activities. The Committee has also 

provided $11,805,000 above the budget request for the cooperative 

fire portion of the national fire plan within the wildland fire management account, including $58,000,000 for State fire assistance 

and $8,500,000 for volunteer fire assistance. 

Cooperative forestry.—The Committee recommends $162,023,000 

for cooperative forestry, $1,469,000 above the budget request and 

$25,268,000 below the 2002 funding level. This funding includes 

$133,133,000 within the conservation spending category, 

$14,425,000 above the request and $32,133,000 above the enacted 

level for these activities. The conservation spending category includes $60,000,000 for forest legacy, $36,235,000 for urban and 

community forestry, and $36,898,000 for forest stewardship. Funding for the forest legacy program is derived from the land and 

water conservation fund (LWCF), as requested. Forest stewardship 

program funding does not come from the LWCF although the Administration did make that request. 

Forest stewardship.—The Committee recommends $36,898,000 

for forest stewardship, $12,628,000 below the request and 

$3,727,000 above the enacted level. The proposed new initiatives 

are not funded. The 2002 funding level is maintained for the 

Chesapeake Bay program ($750,000), the National Agroforestry 

Center ($420,000) and activities in the New York City watershed 

($500,000). The Committee notes the large infusion of new mandatory funding from the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 

2002, which includes up to $5,000,000 in 2002 and $20,000,000 in 

2003 for the Forest Land Enhancement program and which replaces the stewardship incentives and forest incentives programs. 

99

The Committee directs the Forest Service to include in its subsequent budget justifications a clear exposition of plans for this mandatory funding and how this new program relates to and interacts 

with cooperative forestry programs receiving discretionary funding. 

Forest legacy program.—The Committee recommends 

$60,000,000 for the forest legacy program, $9,797,000 below the request and $5,000,000 below the enacted level. The Committee recommends the following distribution of funds:

State Project Committee

Recommendation

AL Coon Gulf, phase 2 ...................................................................................... $2,000,000 

CO Spruce Mountain Ranch ............................................................................. 1,875,000 

CT Stone House Brook Project ......................................................................... 1,100,000 

DE Green Horizons, phase 2 ............................................................................. 2,000,000 

GA Pine Mountain ............................................................................................. 5,000,000 

GA Sheffield ....................................................................................................... 100,000 

HI McCandless Ranch ...................................................................................... 1,300,000 

IA Yellow River Forest Project ........................................................................ 700,000 

IL Coon Creek Woods ...................................................................................... 95,000 

IL Kite River ..................................................................................................... 305,000 

IN Mt. Tea Ridge .............................................................................................. 1,600,000 

MA Karner Brook Ridge .................................................................................... 525,000 

MA Camp Hi-rock ............................................................................................... 500,000 

MD Pintail ........................................................................................................... 150,000 

MD Deer Creek ................................................................................................... 150,000 

ME Leavitt Plantation ....................................................................................... 600,000 

MN North Duluth, phase 1&2 ........................................................................... 410,000 

MT Schumann .................................................................................................... 600,000 

NC RPM project ................................................................................................. 3,000,000 

NC Fort Bragg borderlands .............................................................................. 600,000 

NH Connecticut Lakes Headwaters .................................................................. 4,000,000 

NJ Lake Gerard, New Jersey Highlands ........................................................ 4,000,000 

NM Lagunas Bonitas .......................................................................................... 1,500,000 

NY East Branch Fish Creek, phase 2 .............................................................. 1,500,000 

OR South Eugene Hills ..................................................................................... 1,062,000 

OR Coburg Hills ................................................................................................. 1,000,000 

PR Rio Abajo North area, phase 2 ................................................................... 1,000,000 

RI Weetamoo Woods, phase 2 .......................................................................... 250,000 

RI Duvall Trail Corridor .................................................................................. 200,000 

SC Great Pee Dee river, Coastal Forests phase 3 .......................................... 4,000,000 

TN Anderson—Tully .......................................................................................... 3,500,000 

TN Jim Creek, Pickett State Forest ................................................................. 838,000 

TN McLaughlin tract ......................................................................................... 800,000 

UT Castle Rock, phase 2 ................................................................................... 2,000,000 

UT Range Creek #3 ........................................................................................... 1,550,000 

VA Sandy Point ................................................................................................. 575,000 

VA Romine project ............................................................................................. 600,000 

VA Buffalo River Crossing ................................................................................ 200,000 

VT Monitor Barns ............................................................................................. 300,000 

WA Skykomish River Landscape, phase 2 ....................................................... 920,000 

WI Bad River Headwaters ................................................................................ 3,450,000

Project subtotal ........................................................................................ 55,855,000 

Forest Service program administration and AON planning .................... 4,145,000

Total .......................................................................................................... 60,000,000

During the past year the Committee has examined the forest legacy program in great detail and finds that there are substantial 

management problems. This includes problems with national direction and oversight, coordination, priority setting, and especially, financial management. The details of these findings are contained in 

a report dated June 14, 2002, which the Committee will publish so 

all interested parties have access. The Committee still feels that 

there is merit to the forest legacy conservation easement approach 

100

with its heavy State involvement, but substantial changes will be 

required at all levels of its operation. The Committee has increased 

forest legacy program administration funding by $292,000 above 

the request in order to enhance program and financial management and provide funds for certain priority land or easement appraisals or appraisal reviews. 

The Committee directs the Forest Service to submit a 5-year forest legacy program strategy that includes planned funding requirements. The strategy should identify where funds will be focused to 

provide the greatest national benefit and contain a proposed project 

selection process supportive of the 5-year strategy. The Committee 

further directs the Forest Service to revise and finalize its Forest 

Legacy Program Implementation Guidelines by December 31, 2002. 

The revised guidelines should include definitive guidance regarding 

project definition, cost shares, monitoring, appraisals, and other 

areas of concern noted in the Committee’s report, dated June 14, 

2002, describing its review of the program. 

The Committee directs the Forest Service to develop a policy regarding the Federal review of appraisals for Forest Legacy projects 

that will ensure those appraisals are meeting Federal standards. 

The Committee is concerned with the manner in which cost 

share is calculated. The Committee directs that the Forest Service 

require that 25% of the total cost of each project be non-Federal 

and that grants not be awarded unless this cost share can be met. 

The cost share may include donated funds or donated interests-inlands or lands, but it may not include the operating or administrative costs associated with appraisals, monitoring or other administrative aspects of the program by States or other partners. 

The Committee also expects that each conservation easement or 

land transfer contract clearly indicate that the State will monitor 

and evaluate the subsequent land use for the length of the easement and periodically report to the Forest Service. Contracts 

should also provide for public access unless it would clearly be injurious to special natural resource values. 

The Committee is concerned that forest legacy program managers are not using the Forest Service’s official financial accounting 

system, the Foundation Financial Information System (FFIS), to 

manage forest legacy funds. The Committee directs the Forest 

Service to ensure FFIS contains accurate and complete expenditure 

information for forest legacy grants and that it supports program 

management information requirements. The Committee further directs the Forest Service to improve the ability of FFIS to track the 

status of individual projects by: (1) defining what constitutes a forest legacy’’ project,’’ and (2) requiring separate grants for each 

project. The Committee directs the Forest Service to use a single 

grant authorization and payment system for the forest legacy program. The Committee expects that forest legacy grants will not be 

awarded to ‘‘geographical areas’’ such as the West Branch and 

South Carolina Coastal Restoration projects, rather the grants 

should be for specific identified tracts. 

The Committee notes that it did not provide funding allocations 

requested in the budget of $500,000 each to eight States which 

have yet to qualify for the forest legacy program. According to the 

Forest Service statements in the hearing record, these States are 

still completing their assessments of need; the States have not even 

101

established forest legacy areas, and they have no project proposals 

yet. The Committee action will prevent the funding of questionable 

projects which has occurred in the recent past when States received 

funding with no project stipulations. 

The Committee is concerned that the proposed restructuring of 

the West Branch project, ME, may not serve the best interests of 

the Nation or the forest legacy program. This project has gone 

through major changes. When first proposed to the Congress it was 

to provide conservation easements for over 600,000 acres. The 

project then was advertised by Maine as a $30,000,000 total project 

on 333,000 acres, requiring a $20,000,000 forest legacy investment. 

Now, the Committee understands that Maine hopes to utilize about 

$20,000,000 in forest legacy program funds to purchase 47,000 

acres fee simple and expects the Forest Society of Maine to complete a separate $12,000,000 conservation easement on adjoining 

282,000 acres. The Committee directs that the Appropriations 

Committees of both Houses of Congress shall be notified at least 

thirty days in advance of any proposal to commit or obligate funds 

for this project. Further, before any Federal funds are expended on 

this project, the Committee directs the Forest Service to demonstrate that the State and private cost share of $12,000,000 will 

be available and applied by January 2004, in order that the 

planned leveraging of forest legacy funds for this project is not diminished. 

Urban and community forestry.—The Committee recommends 

$36,235,000 for the urban and community forestry activity as requested, $235,000 above the 2002 funding level. This recommendation includes $500,000 to support the Northeastern Pennsylvania 

community forestry program and $1,000,000 for the Chicago 

Greenstreets program. Last year the Committee encouraged the 

Forest Service to use urban and community forestry funds to develop special living memorials, using trees, to commemorate the 

tragic events of September 11, 2001. The Forest Service targeted 

$1,500,000 of available funds for this special emphasis program. 

The results have been tremendous but the work of creating lasting 

memorials for individuals and communities has not been completed. Accordingly, the Committee directs the Forest Service, 

working in close harmony with the involved States and local participants, to focus the same level of funding in fiscal year 2003 for 

planning, development, and implementation of the living memorial 

projects in New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and critical surrounding areas. 

Economic action programs.—The Committee recommends 

$19,890,000 for economic action programs, $15,790,000 below the 

2002 level and $19,890,000 above the request. Within the economic 

action program the Committee recommends the following distribution of funds:

Committee 

Program component recommendation 

Economic recovery ................................................................................. $5,000,000 

Rural development ................................................................................. 5,000,000

Forest products conservation & recycling ............................................ 1,500,000

Special projects: 

Allegheny NF area regional tourism, PA ..................................... 200,000

Arid Lands Research Consortium ................................................. 300,000

Cradle of forestry conservation ed, NC ......................................... 590,000 

102

Committee 

Program component recommendation 

Cradle of forestry sustainability study, NC ................................. 150,000 

Four Corners Sustainable Forestry ............................................... 1,000,000

Gonzaga Univ. Inland NW Natural Resources Research Center, WA ......................................................................................... 1,000,000

KY mine waste reforestation ......................................................... 1,000,000

Lake Tahoe erosion control grants, CA NV .................................. 2,000,000

NY City watershed enhancement .................................................. 1,000,000

Univ. WA landscape management ................................................ 250,000 

Univ. WA and WA St. U. extension forestry ................................ 900,000

Subtotal, special projects ............................................................ 8,390,000 

Total economic action ................................................................. 19,890,000

The Committee disagrees with the administration’s proposal to 

eliminate entirely the economic action programs. These cost share 

efforts provide vital capacity building for rural communities which 

can aid greatly the forest dependent communities. The Committee 

has agreed to phase out the Pacific Northwest Assistance specific 

funding line item but the funding for economic recovery and rural 

development are increased to partially offset this change. Pacific 

Northwest area communities may compete for these funds on an 

equal footing with other forest dependent communities. The conservation education funding for the Cradle of Forestry and the Pisgah Forest Institute is to the Educational Research Consortium of 

Western North Carolina. 

Forest resource information and analysis.—The Committee has 

provided $9,000,000, $4,004,000 above the request and $3,985,000 

above the 2002 enacted level for the Forest resource information 

and analysis activity created in fiscal year 2001. These funds 

should be used in partnership with the State foresters and others 

to enhance the forest inventory and analysis program, which is 

managed within the forest research and development branch. The 

funds should be used to accelerate the inventory cycle time. 

International forestry.—International forestry is provided 

$6,000,000, $964,000 above the request and $737,000 above the fiscal year 2002 funding level. The Committee is encouraged by the 

successful partnerships in the international program. The Committee expects these efforts to continue and the international program should provide forestry and timber expertise to the Federal 

government’s policy deliberations. 

NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM

Within the National Forest System, which covers 192 million 

acres, there are 51 congressionally designated areas, including 20 

National recreation areas, and 7 National scenic areas. The NFS 

includes a substantial amount of the Nation’s softwood inventory. 

In fiscal year 2000 over 2.54 billion board feet of timber was harvested on NFS lands. More than 9,000 farmers and ranchers pay 

for permits to graze cattle, horses, sheep and goats on 74 million 

acres of grassland, open forests, and other forage-producing acres 

of the National forest system. The NFS includes over 133,000 miles 

of trails and 23,000 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 responsibilVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
103

ities for more than 3,000 species of wildlife and fish, and 10,000 

plant species and provides important habitat and open space for 

over 400 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, 2002 .............................................................. $1,331,439,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 1,366,475,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 1,370,567,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +39,128,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +4,092,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

104


Insert offset folio 1 here HR564.021
105

The Committee recommends $1,370,567,000 for the National forest system, $4,092,000 above the budget request and $39,128,000 

above the 2002 funding level. 

Land management planning.—The Committee recommends 

$77,395,000 for land management planning, $5,200,000 above the 

request and $7,037,000 above the 2002 level. The Forest Service 

must limit planning activities to these funds and not use other 

funds to support the land management planning activity. The Committee has included within the increase a total of $2,500,000 to expedite the forest plan revisions for the Black Hills NF, SD. 

Inventory and monitoring.—The Committee recommends 

$175,306,000 for inventory and monitoring, $1,000,000 below the 

request, and an increase of $1,990,000 above the 2002 level. The 

Committee notes that this allocation includes $6,200,000, as requested, for activities associated with the Forest Inventory and 

Analysis program. Within the allocation the Committee has included increases of $500,000 for the Lake Tahoe basin and 

$300,000 for the Waldo Lake basin, OR, for watershed assessments 

and adaptive management activities to develop long-term, scientifically valid management for these ultra-oligotrophic watersheds 

and $180,000 for the National Forests of North Carolina for inventories of plants which may be harvested or collected. 

Last year the Committee required the Secretary of Agriculture 

and the Secretary of the Interior to charter an interagency group 

to address rangeland assessment and monitoring issues at both 

local and national scales, and develop a coordinated plan and budget to carry out standardized soil surveys and ecological classification on all the nation’s rangelands. The Committee expects the Secretaries to provide a detailed progress report by February 1, 2003 

on how they have responded to that direction and include in the 

next budget justifications a display of the projected budget and personnel needs to initiate coordinated inventory, assessment and 

monitoring of the Nation’s rangelands on a continuing basis. The 

Forest Service effort should include all staffs involved in inventory. 

USDA agencies, including the Natural Resources Conservation 

Service, should be full partners in this effort. 

Recreation, heritage and wilderness.—The Committee recommends $254,444,000 for recreation heritage and wilderness, 

$2,000,000 above the request and $8,944,000 above the 2002 level. 

Volunteer work and contributions by the recreation community are 

impressive and accordingly the Committee has provided funding increases in support of these efforts. The Committee recognizes the 

national significance and responsibility of the Forest Service to administer the Pacific Crest, Continental Divide, and Florida National Scenic Trails and the Nez Perce National Historic Trail and 

directs that funding for administration and management for these 

trails be increased $1,500,000 above the request. Similarly, funding 

for those parts of the Appalachian, North Country and Ice Age National Scenic Trails and the Lewis & Clark, Santa Fe, Anza, 

Iditarod, Oregon, California, Mormon pioneer, Pony Express, Overmountain Victory and Trail of Tears National Historic trails managed by the Forest Service should be funded $400,000 above the request. The Committee directs the Forest Service to include a report 

in the fiscal year 2004 budget justification indicating the projects, 

activities and programs accomplished along these national scenic 

106

and historic trails with these funds and the work proposed to be 

done and the funding needed to support work along these trails in 

the subsequent three years. 

The Committee is supportive of work done by the Carhart Wilderness training institute. Its funding should be maintained at no 

less than the fiscal year 2002 level. Much of the funding for this 

center is derived from contributions and reimbursements by Department of the Interior user agencies. The Committee believes 

that a more stable fiscal planning process is necessary so the Department of the Interior is encouraged to meet with the Forest 

Service to determine fiscal requirements which should be built into 

each bureau and agency budget. 

Wildlife and fish habitat management.—The Committee recommends $133,948,000 for wildlife and fish habitat management, 

an increase of $442,000 above the request and $2,101,000 above 

the 2002 level. Included in the increase above the request is 

$300,000 to continue the threatened, endangered and sensitive species work on the National Forests in North Carolina; the remainder 

is for fixed costs. 

Grazing management.—The Committee recommends $40,850,000 

for grazing management, $5,000,000 above the request and 

$6,075,000 above the 2002 funding level. The Committee has provided this large increase to help the forests get on track with 

NEPA work required for updating allotment management plans. 

Within Title III—General Provisions, the Committee has included 

bill language, which provides continuity for permitees while these 

environmental assessments are being completed. 

Forest products.—The Committee recommends $265,353,000 for 

forest products, $600,000 above the request and $987,000 below the 

2002 funding level. The increase includes $300,000 to continue the 

CROP project on the Colville NF, WA and a $300,000 increase to 

the base program on the National Forests in North Carolina. 

Vegetation and watershed management.—The Committee recommends $192,244,000 for vegetation and watershed management, 

$1,600,000 above the budget request and $2,131,000 above the 

2002 funding level. The increase above the request includes 

$1,000,000 for mitigation of abandoned mines on the Wayne NF, 

OH, and $600,000 for watershed improvement activities in the 

Lake Tahoe Basin. The Committee encourages the Forest Service 

to continue partnership activities with the Canaan Valley Institute, 

WV, that are helping to restore Seneca Creek and other important 

aquatic areas. 

Minerals and geology management.—The Committee recommends $51,635,000 for minerals and geology management, 

$2,000,000 below the request and $2,679,000 above the 2002 funding level. 

Land ownership management.—The Committee recommends 

$97,016,000 for land ownership management, $6,000,000 above the 

request and $8,582,000 above the 2002 funding level. The Committee provides this increase because of the huge operational backlog and shortfall in this program area, which provides vital, basic 

public service. The Committee directs the Forest Service to maintain the full time lands team to work on the Pacific Crest Trail 

project and other similar projects, and focus on those trails segments where access and public service needs are greatest. 

107

Law enforcement operations.—The Committee recommends 

$81,392,000 for law enforcement operations, $1,250,000 above the 

budget request and $2,392,000 above the 2002 funding level. This 

funding includes a total of $750,000 for the special law enforcement 

problems associated with marijuana eradication in the Daniel 

Boone National Forest and $500,000 for drug control problems on 

the Mark Twain NF, MO. 

Other.—The Committee has provided $984,000 as requested for 

management of the Valles Caldera National Preserve, NM but 

notes that if there are specific infrastructure needs, such funding 

should be requested under the capital improvement and maintenance appropriation and compete with other Forest Service 

projects. 

The Committee directs that overall funding for Land Between the Lakes NRA (KY and TN) be no less than $8,400,000. The Forest Service should determine the appropriate funding mix from all 

accounts, not just the NFS appropriation. 

The Committee recommendation includes the full funding requested by the Administration for the Quincy Library Group 

project in California. 

The Committee has not included the new funding requested in 

the NFS account for transfer to the Interior and Commerce departments as reimbursement for endangered species consultations. The 

Committee has retained this authority as in the past two years 

within the wildland fire management account. 

The Committee is pleased that there is an effort underway 

through the interagency invasive species council to deal with the 

serious national problem of invasive species. The Committee expects the Agriculture Department, and others, to develop a fiscal 

year 2004 budget crosscut with shared interagency goals, interagency strategies, and interagency performance measures. The 

Committee is especially supportive of efforts to develop shared 

interagency performance measures for invasive species programs, 

and encourages the Forest Service and other agencies involved in 

the crosscut to develop these on an expedited basis, so that at least 

some of these performance measures may be applied during fiscal 

year 2003. The next budget justification should include a display 

on this issue. 

Challenge Cost Share Program.—The Committee is concerned at 

the inability of the Forest Service to provide credible and accurate 

information regarding contributions of funds and services by third 

parties. Effective use of the Challenge Cost Share program and 

other opportunities to leverage federal funds is essential if the Forest Service is to manage the nation’s natural resources and provide 

services to the public. The Committee finds the agency’s recordkeeping and accomplishment reporting in this area to be inadquate 

and expects prompt action to rectify the problem. Accordingly, the 

agency is directed to provide a comprehensive report to the Committee by December 31, 2003, reflecting accomplishments through 

September 30, 2003. The information shall at a minimum include 

a display of work activities, funds or services contributed by third 

parties, Federal funds leveraged, and accomplishments of the Challenge Cost Share program. Further, the Committee directs the Forest Service to incorporate this information into the development of 

its field based project work planning system in order to assure that 

108

reporting on activities associated with leveraged Federal funds is 

integrated with the recurring work planning and accomplishment 

reporting processes of the agency. Subsequent budget justifications, 

beginning with 2004, should contain a display of challenge cost 

share accomplishments and plans, by budget line item, as was the 

case in fiscal year 2000. 

WILDLAND FIRE MANAGEMENT

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $1,560,349,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 1,369,138,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 1,513,449,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥46,900,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +144,311,000 

The Committee recommends $1,513,449,000 for wildland fire 

management, $144,311,000 above the budget request and 

$46,900,000 below the 2002 funding level. The Committee recognizes the serious situation concerning wildland fire management 

and the need for a sustained commitment of resources and talent 

throughout the Nation. This effort requires an integrated approach 

utilizing skills across the entire spectrum of the agency and from 

many partners, especially the States. 

The national fire plan agreed to by the Administration and the 

nation’s governors includes four major areas of focus, as well as the 

need for accountability and research and development for all aspects. The Administration’s budget request recognizes only two aspects, fighting fires and reducing hazardous fuels; the request nearly ignores the other two critical aspects: restoration and rehabilitation, and community assistance. The Committee has used the 

scarce resources available to support these latter aspects, as well 

as insist on adequate accountability and support for research and 

development for this multi-billion dollar endeavor. 

Bill language.—The Committee has not included the Administration’s request for a number of changes to bill language, such as 

contracting authorities for hazardous fuels or the establishment of 

what was termed, ‘‘fire plain easements’’. The Committee has continued bill language from fiscal year 2002, which provides expanded contracting and cooperative agreement authorities that facilitate wildfire management and hazardous fuels reduction activities, especially in the wildland-urban interface. The Committee has 

also included bill language as requested allowing the transfer of 

certain funds to the Department of the Interior and the Department of Commerce to reimburse Endangered Species Act mandated 

consultation costs incurred during the implementation of the wildfire program. The Committee expects that the respective Departments will pursue sufficient funds for these activities in subsequent 

years. The Committee remains very concerned that the KnutsonVandenberg (KV) reforestation fund has been used to fund emergency fire suppression operations and that these funds have not 

been repaid. The Committee expects the Administration to make a 

good faith effort to repay the KV-fund so that vital reforestation 

and land improvement activities are not put at jeopardy. 

Wildfire preparedness.—The Committee recommends 

$640,000,000 for wildfire management preparedness, an increase of 

$39,297,000 above the request and $17,382,000 above the enacted 

level. 

109

The Committee is aware that the Forest Service and the four Interior bureaus participating in Wildland Fire Management activities use different systems and procedures for determining their 

readiness for control of wildfires. The Committee has been informed that the Departments have been engaged in efforts to design and develop tools for fire program managers that would be 

used by the Forest Service and all of the Interior bureaus. The 

Committee is encouraged that the Departments have been working 

together to develop common systems to plan their activities, however, the Committee is concerned that a complex system may require significant funding and take many years to develop. 

The Committee therefore directs the Departments to design and 

develop a focused automated system for preparedness resource 

planning to replace the systems currently in use by the fire management agencies. The Committee believes a limited system can be 

designed and implemented by the end of fiscal year 2004. The development and design of the information technology system for fire 

preparedness will be conducted according to standard Federal regulations for planning, budgeting, acquisition and management of 

capital assets. The Committee further directs that the agencies deliver quarterly progress reports that describe the project status and 

provide updated cost information. 

Wildfire suppression operations.—The Committee recommends 

$420,669,000 for wildfire suppression operations as requested in 

the budget, an increase of $99,378,000 above the total funding 

available for this activity in fiscal year 2002. 

The Committee is concerned about rising suppression costs and 

the lack of incentives to consider costs during a large-fire incident. 

The Committee believes that cost containment should become more 

prominent among the priorities for suppressing wildland fires. 

Therefore, the Committee directs the Forest Service and the Department of the Interior to take the following steps designed to increase cost consciousness during such incidents: 1) directly monitor, 

evaluate, and report publicly on the costs of each large-fire incident 

following its conclusion; 2) evaluate and report on the cost-effectiveness of all Type I and Type II incident management teams at the 

end of each fire season; 3) at the end of each year, evaluate and 

report on the fire costs of each Forest Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and 

Fish and Wildlife land unit experiencing large wildfires that year; 

and 4) establish a uniform, automated cost-reporting system to 

support these requirements efficiently and effectively. 

The Committee is well aware that making progress in containing 

suppression costs will require a dedicated effort by many Federal 

and non-Federal cooperators pursuing a wide range of coordinated 

and vital activities on their own lands to manage hazardous fuels 

appropriately, mitigate wildland-urban interface hazards, and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of wildland fire suppression. 

Clearly, the resources required to meet these cross-boundary needs 

will be more than the Federal government alone can supply. Therefore, the Committee directs the Forest Service and the Department 

of the Interior to develop jointly equitable and effective collaborative mechanisms for prioritizing needed activities and sharing 

their costs among the various Federal, State, local, tribal, and priVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
110

vate landowners involved, including those in wildland-urban interface communities. 

To support development of such collaborative mechanisms, the 

Committee directs the Forest Service and the Department of the 

Interior to contract for a thorough, independent study of how potential mechanisms, such as a matching grant program, could 

work. This study shall consider how best to take advantage of relevant existing Federal programs for disaster mitigation, biomass 

utilization, and community and private fire protection programs. 

The Departments should equally share the cost of this study; a preliminary report should be available to the Committee by May 31, 

2003, and the final report should be completed by September 30, 

2003. 

The Forest Service shall conduct flight trials under appropriate 

atmospheric conditions to determine the applicability of passive 

millimeter-wave imaging in aiding Federal fire fighting missions. 

The Committee has been repeatedly disappointed with the inability of the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture to produce 

accurate and timely cost information regarding specific fire suppression projects. Agency officials have said that this is the result 

of the use of different accounting and finance systems by the 

wildland fire management agencies. The Committee urges the Departments to consider the potential for unified accounting for the 

wildland fire management appropriation accounts in the future. We 

recognize that this would be a long-term effort. In the meantime, 

we direct the agencies to establish standard coding practices and 

procedures for fire suppression activities beginning in fiscal year 

2003. We expect the agencies to develop a protocol that would work 

in each financial system and be followed by each agency. The protocol should provide clear, standard instructions for assigning cost 

codes to be used for each fire event. The protocol should be wellunderstood and uniformly used by fire management and finance officers in each agency. The agencies will be expected to produce reports promptly when requested by the Committee. If there are any 

technical impediments to complying with this directive, agency finance officials must brief the Committee on those impediments and 

be prepared to offer alternative solutions to the project cost reporting problem. 

Other wildfire operations.—The Committee recommends 

$452,750,000 for other wildfire operations, an increase of 

$105,014,000 above the request and an increase of $36,340,000 

above the funding in fiscal year 2002. The Committee recommends 

the following distribution of funds within the Forest Service for 

these vital portions of the national fire plan:

OTHER WILDFIRE OPERATIONS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

FY 2002 enacted Request Committee recommendation 

Hazardous Fuels .................................................................................... $209,010 $228,109 $228,109 

Rehabilitation and restoration .............................................................. 62,668 3,624 63,000 

Fire Facilities Backlog .......................................................................... 20,376 0 20,376 

Research and Development .................................................................. 27,265 21,427 27,265 

Joint Fire Science .................................................................................. 8,000 8,000 8,000 

State Fire Assistance ............................................................................ 56,383 46,455 58,000 

Volunteer Fire Assistance ..................................................................... 8,262 8,240 8,500 

111

OTHER WILDFIRE OPERATIONS—Continued

[In thousands of dollars] 

FY 2002 enacted Request Committee recommendation 

Forest Health—Federal Lands .............................................................. 6,982 6,955 12,000 

Forest Health—Cooperative Lands ....................................................... 4,992 4,979 15,000 

Economic Action Programs ................................................................... 12,472 0 12,500 

Fire Plain Easements ............................................................................ 0 19,947 0

Subtotal—Other Wildfire Operations ...................................... 416,410 347,736 452,750 

The Committee has provided the budget request, an increase of $19,099,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level, for hazardous fuels reduction work. Within this total, the Committee has also continued 

the previous funding of $5,000,000 for the Community Forest Restoration Act and up to $15,000,000 for use on adjacent non-Federal 

lands when hazard reduction activities are planned on national forest system lands. The Committee strongly encourages the Forest 

Service to work with the University of Arizona, or allow the University, to reduce hazardous fuels around the telescopes on Mt. 

Graham, AZ. 

The Committee has provided $20,376,000, which was not requested by the Administration but is equal to the 2002 enacted 

level, to continue the effort to reduce the wildfire facilities maintenance and reconstruction backlog. Adequate facilities are essential 

as increased staffing and resources are brought to bear in this program. Within this funding, the Committee designates $1,200,000 to 

rehabilitate the Medford, OR, airtanker base. The Committee expects that the State of Oregon and the local counties will be full 

partners in maintaining and staffing this base in the future. The 

Committee also includes $650,000 for the interagency wildfire station at Pinhook, FL. 

The Committee has also restored $63,000,000 for the burned 

area rehabilitation and restoration program first proposed in fiscal 

year 2001. The Committee expects the Forest Service, in close partnership with the Department of the Interior, to continue the native 

plant program with at least $4,000,000 and work under the aegis 

of the Plant Conservation Initiative which unites the Federal land 

managing agencies with many partners; this funding should be 

used to develop a cooperative native plant program and not be used 

merely to support existing federal nurseries. This expanded program is designed to go beyond emergency stabilization to include 

the reintroduction of native plants into these burned over areas before exotic species can gain a foothold and to encourage rural industries to produce plant materials. The Committee has provided $8,000,000 for the joint fire science 

program, the same as the enacted level. 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. The Committee has also provided funding for research and 

development activities within the national fire plan. The research 

activities should have national scope including the east and the 

south. 

The Committee has provided $58,000,000 for State fire assist- ance, $11,545,000 above the request and $1,617,000 above the enVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
112

acted level. This funding is in addition to the $25,353,000 provided 

under the State and private forestry heading. The Committee feels 

that the Firewise education effort is vitally important and that this 

effort should be coordinated closely with all partners, including especially the Agriculture Department’s cooperative extension for- esters. The Committee has also included $8,500,000 for volunteer 

fire assistance; this brings the volunteer fire funding to a total of 

$13,540,000. Other community assistance funding provided in support of the national fire plan is $12,500,000 for economic action 

programs; this funding was not requested by the Administration. The Committee has provided $27,000,000 for the forest health portion of the national fire plan, including $12,000,000 for Federal 

lands and $15,000,000 for cooperative efforts with the States and 

others. This funding level is $15,066,000 above the request and 

$15,026,000 above the enacted. This large increase is to establish 

a more integrated approach to forest health including prevention, 

and restoration and rehabilitation of forests and rangelands. The 

Committee expects the Forest Service to focus on major problems, 

such as southern pine beetles, western mountain bark beetles, 

adelgids, and other pests and pathogens which harm forests and 

subsequently increase wildfire hazards. The Committee directs the 

Forest Service to increase its operational effort for southern pine 

beetles at its Asheville, NC office, including scientific and technical 

personnel, as well as specialists in treatment, prevention, and restoration. 

The Committee has recommended an additional appropriation of $500 million to cover unanticipated fiscal year 2002 wildland fire 

costs for the Forest Service. The 2002 fire system is shaping up to 

be one of the most catastrophic in recent memory. At the beginning 

of July the amount of forest area burned exceeded 3.1 million 

acres, a figure nearly triple the 10 year average for this time of 

year and a figure almost 50 percent higher than the disastrous 

2000 fire season. Officials at the National Interagency Fire Center 

have indicated publicly that they believe the peak of the western 

fire season has yet to come and in late June the U.S. Forest Service 

informed the Committee that its fire suppression budget model estimated that $787 million would be required for the direct cost of 

fighting fires during 2002, $466 million above the appropriations 

currently available to the agency. The Committee believes that it 

is essential to provide these amounts in order to avoid undue disruptions either in the firefighting program or in other Forest Service programs from which funds might have to be diverted if appropriations are inadequate. 

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND MAINTENANCE

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $546,188,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 552,088,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 572,731,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +26,543,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +20,643,000 

The Committee recommends $572,731,000 for capital improve- ment and maintenance, $26,543,000 above the enacted and 

$20,643,000 above the request. This recommendation includes 

$64,866,000 from the conservation spending category for deferred 

maintenance needs, infrastructure improvement, and conservation 

113

activities. This conservation category allocation is $14,000,000 

above the request and $3,866,000 above the enacted funding level. 

The conservation spending category funding includes the 

$50,866,000 requested for priority deferred maintenance and an additional $14,000,000 for priority fish passage barrier work described below. 

The Committee agrees to the following distribution of funds:

[In thousands of dollars] 

Activity or project FY 2002 enacted 

2003 budget 

request 

Committee 

recomm. 

Change from 

request 

Facilities: 

Maintenance .......................................................................... $93,926 $104,786 $104,786 0

Capital improvement ............................................................ 70,678 95,714 89,514 ¥$6,200 

Congressional priorities ........................................................ .................... .................... .................... 0 

Allegheny NF Buckaloons, PA ...................................... .................... .................... 436 436 

Allegheny NF Webbs Ferry, PA ..................................... .................... .................... 100 100 

Angeles NF, Rubio Canyon rehab, CA ......................... .................... .................... 1,000 1,000 

Big Bear center, CA ..................................................... .................... .................... 550 550 

Black Kettle NG collocation, OK .................................. .................... .................... 750 750 

Cherokee NF, Prince Gap, TN ....................................... .................... .................... 300 300 

Cheoah RD office reconst., NC .................................... .................... .................... 1,250 1,250 

Cradle Forestry exhibits, NC ........................................ .................... .................... 150 150 

D. Boone NF, Cave Run lake planning, KY ................. .................... .................... 400 400 

Gladie Creek center, KY ............................................... .................... .................... 250 250 

Grey Towers NHS, PA ................................................... .................... .................... 500 500 

Midewin Prairie NTP rehab, IL ..................................... .................... .................... 1,000 1,000 

Nantahala NF Cheoah Point cmpgrd, NC .................... .................... .................... 855 855 

Pisgah NF, Lake Powhatan cmpgrd rehab, NC ........... .................... .................... 250 250 

San Bernardino NF dogwood cmpgrd rehab, CA ......... .................... .................... 1,500 1,500 

Stanislaus NF Emigrant impoundments rehab, CA .... .................... .................... 80 80 

Subtotal Congressional priorities ......................................... 20,843 0 9,371 9,371

Subtotal Facilities ............................................................ 185,447 200,500 203,671 3,171

Roads 

Maintenance .......................................................................... 159,291 153,358 153,358 0 

Capital improvement ............................................................ 67,600 78,535 77,557 ¥978 

Umatilla NF, N. Fk. Touchet road rehab, WA .............. .................... .................... 2,500 2,500

Subtotal Congressional priorities ......................................... 2,775 .................... 2,500 2,500

Subtotal Roads ................................................................. 229,666 231,893 233,415 1,522

Trails 

maintenance ......................................................................... 40,434 36,664 36,664 0 

capital improvement ............................................................. 26,955 32,165 32,165 0 

Congressional priorities ........................................................ .................... .................... .................... 0 

Continental Divide Trail ............................................... .................... .................... 1000 1,000 

FL National scenic trail ............................................... .................... .................... 500 500 

Ocoee River-Thunder Rock trail, TN ............................ .................... .................... 200 200 

Pike-S.I. NF, Corely Mtn tunnel #3, CO ....................... .................... .................... 250 250

Subtotal Congressional priorities ......................................... 2,686 .................... 1,950 1,950

Subtotal Trails .................................................................. 70,075 68,829 70,779 1,950

Total, ................................................................................. 485,188 501,222 507,865 6,643

Conservation category: 

Fish passage barriers ........................................................... .................... .................... 14,000 14,000 

Deferred Maintenance ........................................................... 61,000 50,866 50,866 0

Subtotal conservation category ........................................ 61,000 50,866 64,866 14,000

Total with conservation category ..................................... 546,188 552,088 572,731 20,643 

114

Facilities.—The Committee recommends $203,671,000 for facilities maintenance and capital improvement, $18,224,000 above the 

fiscal year 2002 level and $3,171,000 above the request. The Committee has fully funded the requested funds for facility maintenance. The Committee is aware of a new Forest Service initiative 

to charge units for a facilities maintenance working capital fund. 

The Committee is willing to let this process go forward but we are 

concerned that the assessments should not grow too large and that 

the fund should be used for cyclical maintenance and not as a substitute for Congressional review of major capital construction or reconstruction projects. The Committee has funded the capital improvement request fully but the following projects are not funded: 

Rapid City FSL, SD; Purdue University’s Agriculture Hall; Juneau/

ANM building and associated roads. With the huge backlog of dilapidated Federal buildings and labs, it is inappropriate to fund a 

university building. The Committee remains committed to the research unit at Rapid City, SD, but understands that the current 

proposals for office expansion and lab collocation are too costly; 

once more appropriate designs are made, the Committee will reconsider this project. The Stanislaus NF funding is to conduct NEPA 

analysis on rehabilitation of the 12 dams mentioned in H.R. 434 

which passed the House during the 107th Congress. The Committee directs that the funds for the Grey Towers National Historic 

Site rehabilitation be contingent upon receiving at least equal 

matching funds from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania or other 

sources. 

The Committee has provided funds for the Black Kettle NG, OK 

collocation with the Washita Battlefield National Historic Site. The 

Committee directs the Park Service to make some suitable space 

available at the visitor center to provide basic Forest Service information, including historical and current program orientation, and 

also directs that the Forest Service not pay more than $20,000 per 

year for routine maintenance and basic utilities provided for all collocated facilities, an amount slightly higher than its current expenses. The Committee expects that interagency collaboration on 

facilities, as well as cultural and natural resource protection and 

use, will result in greater long-term efficiency and better service to 

the public. To facilitate this collaboration all future personnel 

placements by either agency at these sites should be considered for 

maximum interagency staffing opportunities. 

Roads.—The Committee recommends $233,415,000 for road 

maintenance and capital improvement, $3,749,000 above the fiscal 

year 2002 level and $1,522,000 above the request. The Committee 

has maintained the road decommissioning authority at 

$15,000,000. 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 and the infrastructure improvement funds 

provided in the conservation spending category.

Recreation on public lands continues to increase rapidly with approximately 220 million visitors to National Forests and Grasslands and 65 million visitors to lands managed by the Bureau of 

Land Management. The Committee is concerned that the public 

have adequate access to these lands. Over a decade ago, a General 

115

Accounting Office (GAO) report found that over 50.4 million acres 

of public lands administered by the Forest Service and Bureau of 

Land Management had inadequate access. The Committee is unaware of whether access to Federal public lands has improved or 

declined since the 1992 GAO report. Therefore, the Committee directs that by January 31, 2003, the Forest Service and Bureau of 

Land Management submit a report(s) that includes the number of 

acres under their jurisdiction that currently have inadequate public 

access by State, what steps have been taken or are currently underway to improve access, what actions are needed to improve access, and the extent to which a central repository of information exists for those lands with access problems. 

Trails.—The Committee recommends $70,779,000 for trails maintenance and capital improvement, $704,000 above the fiscal year 

2002 level and $1,950,000 above the request. This fully funds the 

Administration’s request for trails capital improvement and maintenance. The Committee expects that the National scenic and historic trails will have priority in funding allocations. Under the National forest system account specific directions are included for National scenic and historic trails operations. 

Conservation spending category.—The Committee has included 

$64,866,000 for the conservation spending category within the capital improvement and maintenance appropriation. This includes 

$50,866,000 for deferred maintenance as requested, a decrease of 

$10,134,000 from the enacted level. 

The Committee also has established a significant source of new 

funding to help remediate salmonid fish passage problems. This includes $14,000,000 under this heading for the Forest Service, and 

an additional $4,000,000 for the Bureau of Land Management and 

$2,000,000 for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Committee 

conducted a hearing on this topic and remains concerned that older 

culverts are preventing fish passage to thousands of miles of upstream habitat that could be used by salmonid fish, including listed 

species. Culvert replacement is a very cost-effective way to increase 

habitat available to salmonid fish. The Committee directs the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the Fish and 

Wildlife Service to coordinate jointly a course of action and provide 

a report to the Committee within 90 days of enactment of this Act, 

describing how activities will be coordinated for the accelerated replacement of culverts blocking fish passage. This approach must at 

a minimum address the need for designation of a single lead agency for consultation on these fish passage projects, a process that ensures rapid completion of consultation on fish passage projects, and 

other methods to implement prompt accomplishments. The Federal 

agencies should consult and coordinate with States, watershed 

councils and others to help determine priority projects. The Committee expects that all projects will have appropriate and continual 

monitoring and subsequent evaluation so improvements can be implemented and the effectiveness of this effort and specific techniques determined. The Committee notes that this new funding is 

an addition to the base allocations for the agencies; at the hearing 

the Forest Service indicated that $65,000,000 of the budget request 

for roads, which the Committee has fully funded, would be to fund 

critical deferred maintenance. The base program, including funds 

from other sources such as the State payments bill, was estimated 

116

at $12,500,000 for Region 6 alone; the Forest Service should continue this effort and build on it with the new conservation spending 

category allocation.

LAND ACQUISITION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $149,742,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 130,510,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 146,336,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥3,406,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +15,826,000

The Committee recommends $146,336,000 for land acquisition, an increase of $15,826,000 above the request and $3,406,000 below 

the enacted level. This amount includes $121,336,000 for line item 

projects, $15,000,000 for acquisition management, $1,500,000 for 

cash equalization, $2,000,000 for inholdings and $1,000,000 for wilderness. 

The land acquisition is funded under the conservation spending 

program. 

The Committee agrees to the following distribution of funds:

Committee 

Area and State recommendation 

Apache—Sitgreaves NF (AZ) ................................................................ $1,500,000 

Arapaho NF: Beaver Brook Watershed (CO) ...................................... 4,000,000 

Beaverhead & Deerlodge NF’s: Watershed, RY Timber (MT) ............ 5,000,000 

Chattahoochee NF: Georgia Mountains (GA) ...................................... 3,200,000 

Chequamegon & Nicolet NF’s: Wisc. Wild Waterways (WI) .............. 3,000,000 

Cherokee NF: Tennessee Mountains (TN) ........................................... 4,400,000 

Chippewa & S.NF: Minnesota Wilderness/Water/W’life (MN) ........... 1,950,000 

Cibola NF: La Madera (NM) ................................................................. 3,800,000 

Coconino NF: Sedona/Red Rocks (AZ) .................................................. 2,500,000 

Columbia River Gorge NSA (OR/WA) .................................................. 10,000,000 

Daniel Boone NF: Assorted Inholdings (KY) ....................................... 3,500,000 

Delta NF: Lower Yazoo (MS) ................................................................ 2,000,000 

DeSoto NF: Glen’s Pond (MS) ............................................................... 150,000 

Flathead NF: Swan Valley (MT) .......................................................... 1,500,000 

Florida National Scenic Trail (FL) ....................................................... 5,000,000 

Francis Marion NF (SC) ........................................................................ 2,000,000 

Green Mountain NF: Recreation & Water Enhancement (VT) .......... 1,750,000 

Hoosier NF: Unique Areas (IN) ............................................................ 1,500,000 

Huron & Ottawa NF’s: Great Lakes/Great Lands (MI) ...................... 2,000,000 

Los Padres NF: Big Sur Ecosystem (CA) ............................................. 3,000,000 

Mark Twain NF: Ozark Mtns. Stream and lake frontages (MO) ...... 1,000,000 

Midewin Tallgrass Prairie (IL) ............................................................. 500,000 

Monongahela NF (WV) .......................................................................... 4,000,000 

Multiple NF’s: Chattooga W&SR/Chattooga River (SC/GA/NC) ........ 2,000,000 

Multiple NF’s: Greater Yellowstone Area (MT) .................................. 9,630,000 

Multiple NF’s: I–90 Corridor/Plum Creek and Cascade Conservation Partnership (WA) ....................................................................... 4,500,000 

Multiple NF’s: Idaho Wilderness/W&S Rivers (ID/MT) ...................... 1,700,000 

Multiple NF’s: Lewis & Clark Nat’l Historic Trail (ID/MT) ............... 1,000,000 

Multiple NF’s: Northwest Wild Scenic Rivers (OR/WA) ..................... 2,500,000 

Multiple NF’s: Pacific Crest Trail (CA/OR/WA) .................................. 3,000,000 

Multiple NF’s: Pacific Northwest Streams (OR/WA) .......................... 4,000,000 

Osceola NF: Suwannee Wildlife Corridor—Pinhook (FL) .................. 2,000,000 

Ozark—St. Francis: Arkansas Rivers and Streams (AR) ................... 3,000,000 

San Bernardino NF (CA) ....................................................................... 3,500,000 

Santa Fe NF: Gascon Point—Sawyer (NM) ........................................ 5,500,000 

Sawtooth NF: NRA Easement Program (ID) ....................................... 3,000,000 

Shoshone NF: Felts Parcel (WY) .......................................................... 450,000 

Tahoe NF: North Fork American River, (CA) ..................................... 3,250,000 

Uinta & Wasatch-Cache NF’s: Bonneville Shoreline Trail (UT) ....... 2,265,000 

Uncompahgre & San Juan NF’s: Red Mountain (CO) ........................ 5,000,000 

Wasatch-Cache NF: High Uintas (UT) ................................................ 2,540,000 

117

Committee 

Area and State recommendation 

Wayne NF: Select Lands (OH) ............................................................. 751,000

Subtotal: Federal Acquisition projects ...................................... 126,836,000 

Acquisition Management ....................................................................... 15,000,000 

Inholdings/Exchanges ............................................................................ 2,000,000 

Land Exchange Equalization Payment ................................................ 1,500,000 

Wilderness Protection ............................................................................ 1,000,000 

Total ............................................................................................. $146,336,000

ACQUISITION OF LANDS FOR NATIONAL FORESTS SPECIAL ACTS

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $1,069,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 1,069,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 1,069,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 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 LANDS EXCHANGES

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $234,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 234,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 234,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $234,000 as requested for acquisition of lands to complete land exchanges under the Act of December 4, 1967 (16 U.S.C. 484a). Under the Act, deposits made by public school districts or public school authorities to provide for cash 

equalization of certain land exchanges can be appropriated to acquire similar lands suitable for National forest system purposes in 

the same State as the National forests lands conveyed in the exchanges.

RANGE BETTERMENT FUND

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $3,290,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 3,402,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 3,402,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +112,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $3,402,000, 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. 

118

GIFTS, DONATIONS AND BEQUESTS FOR FOREST AND RANGELAND

RESEARCH

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $92,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 92,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 92,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $92,000, 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, 2002 .............................................................. $5,488,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 5,542,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 5,542,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +54,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $5,542,000, as requested, for the 

management of national forest lands for subsistence uses in Alaska. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS, FOREST SERVICE

The Committee has retained administrative provisions contained 

in previous years. The Committee has provided for a program of 

$2,000,000 for the Youth Conservation Corps, funded through the 

conservation spending category. The Committee has also continued 

the authority for transfers to the National Forest Foundation 

(NFF) and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. The Committee is encouraged by these partnership efforts. The Committee 

is allowing $300,000 in administrative funds to be used by the National Forest Foundation for one more year despite the Administration’s request to end this support. 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. The Committee expects the Administration to promptly prepare supplemental budget requests when they transfer funds from 

other appropriations during wildfire emergencies. The Committee 

has not continued the special conveyance authority for the Green 

Mountain NF, VT but the authority for the Pinchot Institute for 

Conservation is extended for four years. 

The Committee notes the expected increases in indirect costs for 

the Forest Service despite the Administration’s emphasis on 

streamlining agency operations and reducing such costs. While the 

Committee is skeptical that such costs can be reduced by 50 percent, as proposed by the Administration, it is imperative that substantial reductions occur in order to increase the availability of 

funds for on-the-ground work. Although the Committee has eliminated prescriptive bill language regarding management of indirect 

119

costs, the Committee directs the Forest Service to continue to display agency indirect costs in future budget justifications, continue 

its use of standard definitions for such costs, and report to the 

Committee any changes in such definitions. Further, the Committee directs that indirect expenses charged to the Knutson-Vandenberg, Brush Disposal, Cooperative Work-Other, and Salvage 

Sale funds shall be limited to no more than 20% of total obligations. 

The Committee notes the shortfalls in the Field Leadership Decisions Initiative (FLDI) on page 181 of the appendix to the Budget 

of the U.S. Government. Whereas the Committee supports some of 

the intent of this initiative, such as more funding to field units and 

additional outsourcing, as discussed in a hearing with the Chief of 

the Forest Service. The Committee recognizes that much of the specific details on page 181 are impractical. The Committee also disagrees with the large reductions in staffing promoted in this initiative for the next three years, reductions of 2500 persons per year. 

The Forest Service even proposed in its budget justification to take 

all 1245 of its FTE reductions from the wildfire program; this is 

clearly unacceptable. The Committee directs the Forest Service to 

rework its approach and restructure the FLDI and come up with 

a meaningful proposal regarding staffing and indirect costs. 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY

(DEFERRAL)

The Committee recommends the deferral of $50,000,000 in clean 

coal technology funding until fiscal year 2004. These funds are 

needed for the successful conclusion of existing clean coal projects 

but will not be required for obligation in fiscal year 2003. 

The Committee agrees that up to $14,000,000 in prior year funds 

may be used for administration of the clean coal technology program in fiscal year 2002. The Committee encourages the Department to budget for the administrative costs of the remaining clean 

coal projects together with the new clean coal power initiative in 

the fossil energy research and development account beginning in 

fiscal year 2004, and to keep these funds in the fossil energy base 

budget for future years. 

The Committee continues to support the U.S./China Energy and 

Environmental Center, which supports and assists the efforts of 

U.S. companies to promote the use of American clean energy technology in China. This technology will greatly reduce emissions and 

improve energy efficiency. 

FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Fossil energy research and development programs make prudent 

investments in long-range research and development that help protect the environment through higher efficiency power generation, 

advanced technologies and improved compliance and stewardship 

operations. These activities safeguard our domestic energy security. 

This country will continue to rely on traditional fuels for the majority of its energy requirements for the foreseeable future, and the 

activities funded through this account ensure that energy techVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
120

nologies continue to improve with respect to emissions reductions 

and control and energy efficiency. 

Fossil fuels, especially coal, are this country’s most abundant and 

lowest cost fuels for electric power generation. They are why this 

country enjoys the lowest cost electricity of any industrialized economy. The prospects for technology advances for coal and other fossil 

fuels are just as bright as those for alternative energy sources such 

as solar, wind and geothermal. The power generation technology 

research funded under this account has the goal of developing virtually pollution-free power plants within the next 15 or 20 years 

and doubling the amount of electricity produced from the same 

amount of fuel.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $582,790,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 489,305,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 664,205,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +81,415,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +174,900,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

121


Insert offset folio 023 HR564.023
122


Insert offset folio 024 HR564.024
123

The Committee recommends $664,205,000 for fossil energy re- search and development, an increase of $174,900,000 above the 

budget request and $82,415,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. 

The large increases are due, in part, to the fact that in fiscal year 

2002 a portion of the funds for this program were derived by transfer of excess funds from the Clean Coal Technology account. In addition, prior year unobligated balances were used to offset partially 

2002 requirements. The Administration proposed using clean coal 

funding and prior year funds again this year; however, excess 

funds are not available for transfer at this time. The Committee 

has recommended deferring $50,000,000 in Clean Coal Technology 

funding under that account. Changes to the budget request include an increase of $40,000,000 

associated with the Committee’s rejection of the proposal to transfer funds from the clean coal technology program and an increase 

of $14,000,000 associated with the Committee’s rejection of the use 

of prior year balance, which also would have come from the clean 

coal technology program. Other changes to the budget request are 

as follows. 

Fuels and Power Systems.—The Committee recommends 

$281,700,000 for fuels and power systems including increases of 

$18,500,000 for central systems, $21,500,000 for distributed generation systems, $26,600,000 for fuels programs, and $2,000,000 for 

advanced research. There is also a decrease of $12,000,000 for sequestration research and development. Increases for central systems include $4,000,000 for innovations for existing plants and $14,500,000 for advanced systems of which 

$2,500,000 is to continue the ion transport membrane (ITM) oxygen 

project under the integrated gasification combined cycle activity 

and $6,000,000 is for other IGCC programs including Vision 21; 

$3,000,000 is for pressurized fluidized bed systems, which assumes 

a broadening and renaming of that program as described in the report language below; and $3,000,000 is for a direct fuel cell/turbine 

hybrid cost-shared project under the turbines/Vision 21 program. 

In distributed generation systems, increases include $2,000,000 

for tubular solid oxide fuel cells under the fuel cells/Vision 21 hybrids program, $18,000,000 for the solid state energy conversion alliance under the fuel cells/innovative concepts program, and 

$1,500,000 for ramjet technology under the novel generation program. 

In fuels programs, increases include $17,100,000 for transportation fuels and chemicals of which $2,100,000 is to continue the 

ITM syngas project and $15,000,000 to restore partially other programs; $6,000,000 for solid fuels and feedstocks of which 

$3,000,000 is for advanced separations technology and $3,000,000 

is for cost-shared testing of byproducts from coal derived jet fuel; 

and $3,500,000 for advanced fuels research of which $1,500,000 is 

to continue the C–1 chemistry program and $2,000,000 is for sulfur 

tolerant catalysts and cleanup technology for coal use in fuel cells 

under the advanced concepts program. 

The increase in advanced research is to restore funding for the 

focus area on computational science under the technology crosscut 

program. 

Natural Gas Technologies.—The Committee recommends 

$48,190,000 for natural gas technologies, including increases of 

124

$6,700,000 for exploration and production, of which $3,700,000 is 

for advanced drilling, completion, and stimulation (including 

$1,500,000 for Deep Trek) and $3,000,000 is to restore funding for 

the National Laboratory/industry partnership; $6,300,000 for gas 

hydrates, $10,000,000 for infrastructure (including $2,000,000 for 

storage technology), and $2,600,000 to complete the coal mine 

methane projects under the emerging processing technology program. 

Oil Technology.—The Committee recommends $54,900,000 for oil 

technology, including increases of $14,000,000 for exploration and 

production, $4,500,000 for reservoir life extension, and $1,000,000 

for effective environmental protection. The increase for exploration includes $3,000,000 to restore fund- ing for the National Laboratory/industry partnership, $2,000,000 

for fundamental research/PRIME, and $9,000,000 to restore partially funding for other exploration and production research. In reservoir life extension there are increases of $5,000,000 for 

reservoir practices and technology transfer and $2,000,000 is for 

preferred upstream management practices. There is also a decrease 

of $2,500,000 for a minority education initiative. 

The increase for effective environmental protection partially restores funding for that program. 

Other.—The Committee recommends increases of $2,000,000 for 

cooperative research and development and $500,000 for fixed costs 

in the import/export authorization program. The Committee also 

recommends an increase of $3,000,000 for contract services at the 

National Energy Technology Laboratory under the program direction budget activity. In general plant projects, increases include 

$1,000,000 for the Albany Research Center and $11,000,000 for 

funding the second year of a seven year renovation effort at the 

National Energy Technology Laboratory. An increase of $700,000 

for fixed costs is recommended for the advanced metallurgical processes program at the Albany Research Center. There is also an increase of $1,000,000 to initiate an ongoing annual review of programs by the National Academy of Sciences. Finally, the Committee has not agreed to the use of $14,000,000 in prior year balances as explained above.

The Committee agrees to the following: 

1. The $4,000,000 increase for central systems/innovations for existing plants should be focused in 3 areas: (1) developing data on 

mercury emissions from different types of coal power plants (as a 

function of different coal types and emissions control systems); (2) 

expanding mercury control research and development with emphasis on controlling mercury in plants burning lignite; and (3) evaluating the effect of increased mercury levels in coal power plant byproducts as a result of emissions control. 

2. The $6,000,000 increase for other IGCC (including Vision 21) 

programs should be focused in 3 areas: (1) initiating research and 

development on IGCC gas separation for mercury removal; (2) conducting test runs on multiple coal types with air and with oxygen 

at the Wilsonville power systems development facility; and (3) pursuing research and development on IGCC sensors and controls. 

3. The pressurized fluidized bed program should be renamed and 

broadened to include atmospheric fluidized bed and other advanced 

systems. 

125

4. The carbon sequestration program should be more focused on 

carbon capture. 5. The $9,000,000 increase for other exploration and production 

activities under the oil technology program should be directed toward technology improvements to address the 200 billion barrels of 

oil that is not recoverable by conventional methods. Within this 

category pressure pulse technology for enhanced oil recovery should 

be considered. 

6. With respect to certain programs funded under the energy conservation account, the NETL should continue to be actively involved in the management of the industrial gasification program 

and in the mining industries of the future program. Also, the petroleum industries of the future program should be closely coordinated 

with the oil research and development programs funded under the 

fossil energy account. 

7. The cooperative programs with States and the energy efficiency science initiative—are continued in fiscal year 2003 under 

the energy conservation appropriation. Half of the funding for the 

energy efficiency science initiative is managed by fossil energy, as 

legislated in the fiscal year 2002 Interior and Related Appropriations Act. Projects under the cooperative programs with the States 

should also be coordinated closely with the fossil energy programs 

so that the highest priority energy research projects are funded. 

This same direction applies to the reciprocating engines programs. 

8. The Assistant Secretaries for Fossil Energy and Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy are directed to modify their current 

procurement practice to allow full and open competition to occur, 

when appropriate. This more flexible, pragmatic, and fully responsible approach will achieve technical integrity and improve funding 

efficiencies while maintaining realistic small and minority business 

goals. 

9. The Department should not withhold program funds appropriated by the Congress without justifying such withholdings in advance and in writing to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 10. The $1,000,000 for the National Academy of Sciences review 

of programs should remain in the base for a continuing annual review by the Academy of programs, using the Academy’s matrix, to 

measure the relative benefits expected to be achieved and to inform 

decision making on what programs should be continued, expanded, 

scaled-back, or eliminated. 

NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES

The Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves are managed by 

the Department of Energy to achieve the greatest value and benefit 

to the Government. In fiscal year 1998, NPR–1 (Elk Hills) was sold 

as mandated by the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 

year 1996. That Act also directed the Department to conduct a 

study of the remaining properties—3 Naval Oil Shale Reserves and 

NPR–2 and NPR–3. The National Defense Authorization Act for 

fiscal year 1998 directed the transfer of two of the oil shale reserves (NOSR–1 and NOSR–3) to the Department of the Interior. 

On January 14, 2000, the Department announced it would return 

a portion of the NOSR–2 property in Utah to the Ute Indian Tribe. 

Two properties remain under the jurisdiction of the Department of 

126

Energy. They are NPR–2 in Kern County, CA and NPR–3 in 

Natrona County, WY. The DOE continues to be responsible for routine operation and maintenance of NPR–3, management of the 

Rocky Mountain Oilfield Testing Center at NPR–3, lease management at NPR–2, and continuing environmental and remediation 

work at Elk Hills. For several years after the sale of Elk Hills, 

these programs were operated largely with prior year unobligated 

balances. Those balances were mostly exhausted by fiscal year 

2002 and appropriations to the account were restored in that year.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $17,371,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 20,831,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 20,831,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +3,460,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

127


Insert offset folio 025 HR564.025
128

The Committee recommends $20,831,000 for the operation of the 

naval petroleum and oil shale reserves, which is equal to the budget request. 

ELK HILLS SCHOOL LANDS FUND

Payment to the Elk Hills school lands fund was part of the settlement associated with the sale of Naval Petroleum Reserve Numbered 1. Under the settlement, payments to the fund are to be 

made over a period of seven years.

The Committee recommends $36,000,000 for the Elk Hills school 

lands fund, which is equal to amount available for fiscal year 2002. 

The Committee recommends that these funds be made available on 

October 1, 2003, rather than on October 1, 2002 as proposed in the 

budget. The Committee’s recommendation is consistent with the 

payment of these funds in each of the past few years. This represents the fifth of seven payments to the fund, which was established as a part of the sale of the Elk Hills Naval Petroleum Reserve in California (to settle school lands claims by the State). 

ENERGY CONSERVATION

The energy conservation program of the Department of Energy 

conducts cooperative research and development projects aimed at 

sustaining economic growth through more efficient energy use. Activities financed through this program focus on improving existing 

technologies and developing new technologies related to residential, 

commercial, industrial and transportation energy use. In fiscal year 

2001, funds and programs were transferred from the building sector and industry sector research activities to establish a new distributed generation activity that addresses critical energy needs for 

next generation clean, efficient, fuel flexible technologies for industrial, commercial and institutional applications. These technologies 

use the waste heat energy rejected during electricity generation 

from microturbines, reciprocating engines, and fuel cells in the 

form of cooling, heating and power. This waste heat utilization is 

referred to as ‘‘combined heat and power’’. Also funded under the 

energy conservation heading are the Federal energy management 

program, which focuses on improving energy efficiency in Federal 

buildings, the low-income weatherization assistance program, and 

State energy program grants.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $912,805,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 901,651,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 984,653,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +71,848,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +83,002,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

129


Insert offset folio 026 HR564.026
130


Insert offset folio 027 HR564.027
131

The Committee recommends $984,653,000 for energy conserva- tion, an increase of $83,002,000 above the budget request and 

$71,848,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. Changes to the budget 

request are detailed below. 

Building Technology, State and Community Sector.—The Committee recommends $402,293,000 for building technology, State and 

community sector research, including increases of $6,700,000 for 

building research and standards, $2,000,000 for cooperative programs with the States, $4,000,000 for the energy efficiency science 

initiative, and $700,000 for management and planning. There is 

also a decrease of $19,898,000 for building technology assistance. 

In building research and standards/equipment materials and tools, there are increases of $2,700,000 for space conditioning and 

refrigeration and $4,700,000 for building envelope programs of 

which $1,700,000 is for thermal insulation and building materials, 

$2,500,000 is for electrochromics in the windows technologies program, and $500,000 is for the National Fenestration Rating Council 

database, also in the windows program. There is also a decrease of 

$700,000 for technical/program management support. 

In building technology assistance, there is a decrease of $27,100,000 for the weatherization assistance program, which 

leaves an increase of $20,000,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. 

The Committee also recommends an increase of $11,202,000 for 

State energy programs ($5,000,000 above the 2002 level) and, in 

community energy programs, decreases of $1,000,000 for Rebuild 

America and $3,000,000 for Energy Star. 

The increases for cooperative programs with the States and for 

the energy efficiency science initiative restore funding for those 

programs to the 2002 level. 

The increase for management and planning partially restores 

funding for program direction. The increase of $1,000,000 to initiate an ongoing annual review 

of programs by the National Academy of Sciences is a follow-up to 

the Academy’s report on measuring the success of energy research. 

Federal Energy Management Program.—The Committee recommends $24,880,000 for the Federal energy management program, which is a decrease of $3,000,000 below the budget request 

for program activities. 

Industry Sector.—The Committee recommends $159,859,000 for 

industry sector research, including increases of $6,000,000 for industries of the future (specific), $10,000,000 for industries of the future (crosscutting), $4,000,000 for the energy efficiency science initiative, and $1,500,000 for management and planning. 

In industries of the future (specific), increases include $3,000,000 

for petroleum refining to continue existing projects and to start 

small refiner projects (as directed last year), $2,000,000 for regional 

bio-based consortia under the agriculture program, and, $1,000,000 

for mining. 

In industries of the future (crosscutting), increases include 

$1,000,000 for materials research, $4,000,000 for combustion systems to continue two of the three contracts under the industrial 

gasification program, $2,000,000 for sensors and controls for robotics/repetitive systems technology, $2,000,000 for inventions and innovations to restore the 2002 level, and $1,000,000 for technical assistance/best practices. 

132

The increase for the energy efficiency science initiative restores 

that program to the 2002 level. The Committee commends the Office of Industrial Technologies for continuing the cooperative program with the States in the budget request.

The increase for management and planning is to restore partially 

program direction funding. 

Power Technologies/Distributed Generation Technologies.—The 

Committee recommends $79,704,000 for distributed generation 

technologies including increases of $15,500,000 for distributed energy resources and $300,000 for management and planning. 

In distributed energy resources, increases include $4,000,000 for 

microturbines, $3,000,000 for reciprocating engines, $2,000,000 for 

advanced materials and sensors for power electronics to enhance 

the cost effectiveness of distributed generation, $500,000 for oil 

heat research in the fuel flexibility program, $3,000,000 for thermally activated technologies, and $3,000,000 for applications integration. 

In management and planning, increases include $200,000 to restore partially the evaluation and planning program and $100,000 

to restore partially program direction funding. 

Transportation Sector.—The Committee recommends 

$273,864,000 for transportation sector research, including increases 

of $30,500,000 for vehicle technology research and development, 

$3,700,000 for fuels utilization, $9,100,000 for materials technology, $1,600,000 for technology deployment, $2,000,000 for cooperative programs with States, $4,000,000 for the energy efficiency 

science initiative, and $300,000 for management and planning. 

In vehicle technology, increases include $4,000,000 for heavy vehicle propulsion in the hybrid program, $2,000,000 in fuel cell research/stack subsystem components for research on a substitute for 

platinum in catalysts, $2,000,000 for advanced battery development 

in the electric vehicles program, $3,000,000 for heavy vehicle systems optimization, and $19,500,000 for advanced combustion systems as follows. The advanced combustion systems increase includes $6,000,000 for combustion and emissions control, $3,000,000 

for light truck engines, $6,000,000 for heavy truck engines, and 

$4,500,000 for off highway engines of which $1,000,000 is for railroad/locomotives research, $1,500,000 is for fuel cell applications 

for off road vehicles, and $2,000,000 is for emissions reductions research. 

In fuels utilization, increases include $1,000,000 for medium 

trucks, $1,000,000 for heavy trucks, and $1,700,000 for fueling infrastructure, all in the alternative fuels program. 

In materials technology, increases include $500,000 for automotive propulsion materials, $7,000,000 for lightweight materials 

technologies, and $1,600,000 for the high temperature materials 

laboratory. 

In technology deployment, there is an increase of $3,000,000 for 

the clean cities program and decreases of $500,000 for testing and 

evaluation, $800,000 for EPACT replacement fuels, and $100,000 

for advanced vehicle competitions. 

The increases for the cooperative programs with the States and 

the energy efficiency science initiative restore those programs to 

the 2002 level. 

133

The increase for management and planning is to restore partially 

program direction funding. 

Other.—The Committee recommends an increase of $3,000,000 in 

policy and management to restore partially funding for the regional 

support offices. There is also an increase of $1,000,000 to initiate 

an ongoing annual review of programs by the National Academy of 

Sciences, which follows up on the Academy’s report on measuring 

success of energy research. 

The Committee agrees to the following: 

1. The Department should notify the Committee in the fiscal year 

2004 budget submission on economies and efficiencies realized 

through the recent reorganization of the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy organization. For example, the Committee expects 

that several positions can be eliminated as a result of the consolidation of budget and administration functions. 

2. The cooperative programs with the States and the energy efficiency science initiative should be closely coordinated with the Fossil Energy Research and Development program to ensure the highest priority research needs across both the Fossil Energy and Energy Conservation accounts are addressed. Half of the funding for 

the energy efficiency science initiative is to be managed by fossil 

energy as legislated in the Interior Appropriations Act for fiscal 

year 2002. The mining industry of the future program, the petroleum industry of the future program, the industrial gasification 

program, and the reciprocating engines program should also be coordinated closely with fossil energy. 

3. The Department should report to the Committee by December 

1, 2002, on what it is doing to implement the next generation lighting initiative using funds appropriated for fiscal year 2003. Funding for this initiative should be identified in the fiscal year 2004 

and subsequent budget submissions. 

4. The Rebuild America program should be restructured to a 

small number of manageable consortia rather than hundreds of directly reporting individual programs. The regional support offices 

should assist with the restructuring and help manage the program. 

5. The Committee recognizes the extraordinary cost savings and 

positive environmental benefits achieved by the military through 

the implementation of pulse technology as a major component of its 

battery management programs. The Committee believes that the 

Department of Energy would also benefit significantly and directly 

from the use of this technology to extend the life of vehicle batteries. These benefits include savings in battery replacement costs, 

reduction in overall maintenance costs for vehicles and ancillary 

equipment, and a resultant increase in safety for personnel. The 

Committee urges the Department to incorporate this technology in 

its ongoing purchase and maintenance programs for vehicles. The 

Department should report to the Committee by December 31, 2002, 

on its plans to comply with this direction. Beginning with the fiscal 

year 2004 budget request, the budget submission should include an 

accounting of the extent to which battery pulse technology is being 

employed and the savings expected and realized as a result of the 

use of this technology. The Department should also, through the 

Federal Energy Management Program, encourage the use of this 

technology throughout the Federal government.

134

6. The funding for regional biobased products consortia in the agriculture industry of the future program is to accelerate the development of the bioproducts industry. The goal of this new, competitive, cost-shared program is for each consortium to become self-supporting. 

7. The Department should promote the development of metrics 

that are helpful in tracking improvements in energy and material 

usage, pollutant and greenhouse gas generation, and water use for 

energy intensive industries, and for disseminating the resulting 

lessons learned. 

8. The $3,000,000 increase in distributed energy systems for applications integration should focus on projects in 2 areas: (1) high 

technology industries like telecommunications and (2) development 

and deployment of distributed energy resources architecture, engineering, and design to reduce the risks and costs associated with 

on site generation. 

9. The Northwest Alliance for Transportation Technologies 

should be expanded to support the continued development of essential power systems and advanced emissions technologies for light 

duty and heavy duty vehicles. 

10. In the fiscal year 2004 budget, the Department should consider increasing the engine boosting technology activity funding in 

the vehicle technology program in order to explore engine 

downsizing opportunities and resulting efficiencies through the use 

of turbo chargers. 

11. The $3,000,000 increase in vehicle technologies for heavy vehicle systems optimization should focus on technologies in two 

areas: (1) anti idling and (2) aerodynamic drag. 

12. The Assistant Secretaries for Fossil Energy and Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy are directed to modify their current 

procurement practice to allow full and open competition to occur, 

when appropriate. This more flexible, pragmatic, and fully responsible approach will achieve technical integrity and improve funding 

efficiencies while maintaining realistic small and minority business 

goals. 

13. The Department should not withhold program funds appropriated by the Congress without justifying such withholdings in advance and in writing to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

14. The $1,000,000 for the National Academy of Sciences review 

of programs should remain in the base for a continuing annual review by the Academy of programs, using the Academy’s matrix, to 

measure the relative benefits expected to be achieved and to inform 

decision making on what programs should be continued, expanded, 

scaled-back, or eliminated. 

ECONOMIC REGULATION

The economic regulation account funds the independent Office of 

Hearings and Appeals, which is responsible for all of the Department’s adjudication processes except those that are the responsibility of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The amount 

funded by this Committee is for those activities specific to this bill: 

mainly those related to petroleum overcharge cases. All other activities are funded on a reimbursable basis from the other elements 

135

of the Department of Energy. Prior to fiscal year 1997, this account 

also funded the Economic Regulatory Administration.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $1,996,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 1,487,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 1,487,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥509,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $1,487,000 for economic regulation, 

equal to the budget request and $509,000 below the 2002 level. The 

Committee expects the Department to phase out direct funding for 

the Office of Hearings and Appeals from the Interior bill over the 

next two years. The Committee continues to be concerned about the 

high cost of employees in this office and concerned that the casework, funded by the Interior and related agencies appropriation, 

has not been brought to a timely completion. 

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve was created by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 to provide the United States with 

adequate strategic and economic protection against disruptions in 

oil supplies. The SPR program was established as a 750 millionbarrel capacity crude oil reserve with storage in large underground 

salt caverns at five sites in the Gulf Coast area. It is connected to 

major private sector distribution systems and maintained to 

achieve full drawdown rate capability within fifteen days of notice 

to proceed with drawdown. Storage capacity development was completed in September 1991, providing the capability to store 750 million barrels of crude oil in underground caverns and to be ready to 

deploy at the President’s direction in the event of an emergency. 

As a result of the decommissioning of the Weeks Island site in 

1999, the Reserve lost 70 million barrels of capacity. However, the 

Department has reassessed the capacities of the remaining storage 

sites and estimates those sites are currently capable of storing a 

total of 700 million barrels. During 1998, an inventory of 561 million barrels provided 60 days of net import protection. In 2002, 600 

million barrels provide 54 days of net import protection. The decline in days of net import protection is the result of the growth 

of U.S. requirements for imported crude oil and the reduction in 

U.S. domestic oil production.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $179,009,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 168,856,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 175,856,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥3,153,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +7,000,000

The Committee recommends $175,856,000 for operation of the 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve, an increase of $7,000,000 above the 

budget request and $3,153,000 below the fiscal year 2002 level. 

Changes to the budget request include increases of $4,000,000 in 

storage development and operations, which has been transferred 

from the SPR petroleum account budget to pay for electricity costs 

associated with oil injection, and $3,000,000 in management to restore funding to the 2002 level. 

136

SPR PETROLEUM ACCOUNT

The SPR Petroleum Account was established to fund petroleum 

inventory acquisitions, associated transportation costs, U.S. Customs duties, terminal throughput charges, incremental drawdown 

costs and other related costs associated with filling the SPR.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 11,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 7,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +7,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ ¥4,000,000

The Committee recommends $7,000,000 for the SPR petroleum 

account, a decrease of $4,000,000 below the budget request and an 

increase of $7,000,000 above the 2002 level. The decrease to the 

budget request reflects the transfer of $4,000,000 to the Strategic 

Petroleum Reserve account to cover the electricity costs associated 

with oil injection. The funding provided in this account for fiscal 

year 2003 will complete the existing royalty in kind program and 

support the filling of the SPR to its 700 million barrel capacity. 

NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE

The acquisition and storage of heating oil for the Northeast 

began in August 2000 when the Department of Energy, through 

the Strategic Petroleum Reserve account, awarded contracts for the 

lease of commercial storage facilities and acquisition of heating oil. 

The purpose of the reserve is to assure home heating oil supplies 

for the Northeast States during times of very low inventories and 

significant threats to immediate supply of heating oil. The Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve was established as a separate entity from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve on March 6, 2001. The 

2,000,000 barrel reserve is stored in commercial facilities in New 

York Harbor, Rhode Island, and New Haven, Connecticut.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 8,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 8,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +8,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends $8,000,000 for the Northeast home 

heating oil reserve, equal to the budget request and $8,000,000 

above the fiscal year 2002 level. The program formerly was funded 

as part of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve account. 

ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION

The Energy Information Administration is a quasi-independent 

agency within the Department of Energy established to provide 

timely, objective, and accurate energy-related information to the 

Congress, executive branch, State governments, industry, and the 

public. The information and analysis prepared by the EIA is widely 

disseminated and the agency is recognized as an unbiased source 

of energy information by government organizations, industry, professional statistical organizations and the public.

137

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $78,499,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 80,111,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 80,611,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +2,112,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +500,000 

The Committee recommends $80,611,000 for the Energy Informa- tion Administration, an increase of $500,000 above the budget request and $2,112,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. The increase 

above the request is for essential coal data system improvements. 

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, 58 health centers, 4 school health centers, and 44 health stations. Tribes and tribal groups, through contracts with the IHS, operate 13 hospitals, 161 health centers, 3 

school health centers, and 249 health stations (including 170 Alaska Native village clinics). The IHS, tribes and tribal groups also operate 11 regional youth substance abuse treatment centers and 

2,252 units of staff quarters.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $2,389,614,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 2,453,835,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 2,508,756,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +119,142,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +54,921,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

138


Insert offset folio 028 HR564.028
139

The Committee recommends $2,508,756,000 for Indian health 

services, an increase of $54,921,000 above the budget request and 

$119,142,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. Changes to the budget request are discussed below. Hospital and clinic programs are increased by $36,000,000, in- cluding $33,000,000 for the Indian health care improvement fund 

and $3,000,000 for the Lawton, OK hospital. Dental health programs are increased by $200,000 to fund the increased use of volunteer dentists. Contract health services are increased by 

$15,000,000 to address the large unmet need for contract services. 

Direct operations are increased by $822,000 to address administrative shortfalls at Headquarters and Area Offices. Self-governance is 

decreased by $9,000,000, which leaves sufficient funds for the staffing and operational expenses of the 8 FTEs in that office. An increase of $11,899,000 is provided to cover the cost of health care 

for Public Health Service annuitants. These costs were previously 

paid by the Department of Defense. 

The Committee agrees to the following: 

1. The Lawton, OK hospital was constructed in the 1960s with 

Federal funds but never received any additional funds for staffing 

of new facilities. The situation has reached a crisis level with IHS 

needing to reprogram funds to keep the hospital operating in each 

of the last few years. This situation is unique to the Lawton hospital. These funds should remain in the base to cover ongoing operational needs at the hospital. If additional funds are required, they 

should be justified in the 2004 budget submission. 

2. Funding for the Indian health care improvement fund is limited to the 55 most underfunded units. According to the IHS, this 

is the amount needed to bring those units up to 40 percent of needed funding. 

3. There have been no new self-governance compacts recently 

and therefore funds can be shifted from the self-governance account 

to other underfunded programs. This should not impact existing 

compacts because the funds in this account were intended for 

shortfall costs associated with new compacts. After compacts are 

operational, costs should be funded from health program funds. 

4. Funds for the pharmacy residency program remain in the base 

for fiscal year 2003. 

5. The fiscal year 2001 direction on the use of loan repayment 

program funding should continue to be followed in fiscal year 2003. 

6. The budget increase of $4,000,000 for recruiting health professionals should not be limited to former military and Department of 

Veteran Affairs health professionals. The IHS should pursue those 

recruitment possibilities as part of its overall recruitment program 

but, given the great need for health professionals, it should not set 

aside a specific amount of money for any particular population segment of the recruitment pool. 

7. IHS needs to reexamine its estimates of administrative costs 

for operation of Federally-run health programs and its estimates of 

residual costs for operation of inherently Federal functions at 

Headquarters and Area Offices and request increases for direct operations as needed in the fiscal year 2004 budget. 

Bill language is recommended, under Title III—General Provisions, providing for a demonstration program for the Cheyenne 

River Sioux Tribe in South Dakota. The tribe has reported that, by 

140

offering bonus payments to health professionals, it will be able to 

hire full time personnel at less cost than paying for part time contract health services. The Committee expects the Service to implement this demonstration program within 30 days of enactment of 

this Act; to monitor the program closely; and report to the Committee by April 1, 2003, with an evaluation of the program and recommendations on whether or not it should be extended in fiscal 

year 2004. 

INDIAN HEALTH FACILITIES

The need for new Indian health care facilities has not been fully 

quantified but it is safe to say that many billions of dollars would 

be required to renovate existing facilities and construct all the 

needed new hospitals and clinics. Safe and sanitary water and 

sewer systems for existing homes and solid waste disposal needs 

currently are estimated to amount to over $876 million for those 

projects that are considered to be economically feasible.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $369,487,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 362,571,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 391,865,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +22,378,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +29,294,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

141


Insert offset folio 029 HR564.029
142

The Committee recommends $391,865,000 for Indian health facilities, an increase of $29,294,000 above the budget request and 

$22,378,000 above the fiscal year 2002 level. Changes to the budget 

request include $5,000,000 for maintenance and improvement, 

$2,000,000 for equipment and $22,294,000 for hospital and clinic 

construction, including $1,994,000 to complete the Pawnee, OK 

clinic, $3,000,000 for the Sisseton, SD clinic infrastructure, 

$1,300,000 for design of the Clinton, OK clinic; $5,000,000 for 

phase III of the Bethel, AK clinic staff quarters, $1,000,000 to restore funding for dental units, and $10,000,000 for small ambulatory care facilities. 

The Committee agrees to the following distribution of hospital 

and clinic construction funds:

Project 2003 request Committee recommendation Difference 

Fort Defiance, AZ hospital .......................................................................... $20,400,000 $20,400,000 ........................

Winnebago, NE hospital .............................................................................. 8,241,000 8,241,000 ........................

Pinon, AZ clinic ........................................................................................... 13,900,000 13,900,000 ........................

Red Mesa, AZ clinic .................................................................................... 7,653,000 7,653,000 ........................

Pawnee, OK clinic ....................................................................................... 10,639,000 12,633,000 1,994,000 

St. Paul, AK clinic ....................................................................................... 11,167,000 11,167,000 ........................

Sisseton, SD clinic ...................................................................................... ........................ 3,000,000 3,000,000 

Clinton, OK clinic ........................................................................................ ........................ 1,300,000 1,300,000 

Bethel, AK staff quarters ............................................................................ ........................ 5,000,000 5,000,000 

Small ambulatory facilities ........................................................................ ........................ 10,000,000 10,000,000 

Dental units ................................................................................................ ........................ 1,000,000 1,000,000

Total ............................................................................................... 72,000,000 94,294,000 22,294,000 

The Committee agrees to the following: 

1. The maintenance program funding increase needs to remain in 

the base budget for 2004 and beyond. Further increases will be necessary as existing facilities get older and as more hospitals and 

clinics are built and expanded.

2. The increase for equipment should be focused on replacing outdated analog medical devices with digital medical devices and telemedicine equipment and should remain in the base budget. Further 

increases will be necessary as existing equipment becomes outdated and as more hospitals and clinics are built and expanded. 

3. The Service should continue to work on needed improvements 

to the facilities priority system so that the full range of need for 

facilities in Indian country is given appropriate consideration. 

4. The methodology used to distribute facilities funding should 

address the fluctuating annual workload and maintain parity 

among IHS areas and tribes as the workload shifts. 

5. 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. 

6. 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. 

143

7. 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. 

Bill language is included to continue the Bethel, AK staff quarters project. Fiscal year 2003 is the third year of a four year commitment to this construction project. 

OTHER RELATED AGENCIES 

OFFICE OF NAVAJO AND HOPI INDIAN RELOCATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The dispute between the Hopi and Navajo tribes is centuries-old. 

The Hopi trace their origin on the the land back to the Anasazi 

race whose presence is recorded back to 1150 A.D. Later in the 

16th century Navajo settlement led to the isolation of the Hopi Reservation as an island within the area occupied by the Navajo reservation. In 1882, President Arthur issued an Executive Order 

which granted the Hopi a 2.5 million acre reservation to be occupied by the Hopi and such other Indians as the Secretary of the 

Interior saw fit to resettle there. Intertribal problems arose between the Navajo tribe and the Hopi tribe revolving around the 

question of the ownership of the land as well as cultural differences 

between the two tribes. Efforts to resolve these conflicts were not 

successful and led Congress to pass legislation in 1958 which authorized a lawsuit to determine ownership of the land. When attempts at mediation of the dispute as specified in an Act passed 

in 1974 failed, the district court in Arizona partitioned the Joint 

Use Area equally between the Navajo and Hopi tribes under a decree that has required the relocation of members of both tribes. 

Most of those to be relocated are Navajo living on the Hopi Partitioned Land. 

At this time approximately 233 households remain be relocated, 

of which 24 are full-time residents on the Hopi Partitioned Land. 

A total of 3,269 families have been relocated from the Hopi Partitioned Land.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $15,148,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 14,491,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 14,491,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥657 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $14,491,000 for salaries and expenses of the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation, the 

same as the budget request and $657,000 below the 2002 enacted 

level.

144

INSTITUTE OF AMERICAN INDIAN AND ALASKA NATIVE CULTURE AND

ARTS DEVELOPMENT

PAYMENT TO THE INSTITUTE

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $4,490,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 5,130,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 5,130,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +640 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends $5,130,000 for the Institute of 

American Indian and Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development, the same as the budget request and $640,000 above the 2002 

enacted level. 

SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

The Smithsonian Institution is unique in the Federal establishment. Established by the Congress in 1846 to carry out the trust 

included in James Smithson’s will, it has been engaged for over 150 

years in the ‘‘increase and diffusion of knowledge among men’’ in 

accordance with the donor’s instructions. For some years, it used 

only the funds made available by the trust. Then, before the turn 

of the century, it began to receive Federal appropriations to conduct some of its activities. With the expenditure of both private and 

Federal funds over the years, it has grown into one of the world’s 

great scientific, cultural, and intellectual organizations. It operates 

magnificent museums, outstanding art galleries, and important research centers. Its collections are among the best in the world. Its 

traveling exhibits bring beauty and information throughout the 

country. 

The Smithsonian attracted approximately 33,650,000 visitors in 

2001 to its museums, galleries, and zoological park. Additional millions also view Smithsonian traveling exhibitions, which appear 

across the United States and abroad, and the annual Folklife Festival. As custodian of the National Collections, the Smithsonian is 

responsible for more than 140 million art objects, natural history 

specimens, and artifacts. These collections are displayed for the enjoyment and education of visitors and are available for research by 

the staff of the Institution and by hundreds of visiting students, 

scientists, and historians each year. Other significant study efforts 

draw their data and results directly from terrestrial, marine, and 

astrophysical observations at various Smithsonian installations. 

The Smithsonian complex presently consists of 15 exhibition 

buildings in Washington, DC and New York City in the fields of 

science, history, technology and art; a zoological park in Washington, DC and an animal conservation and research center in 

Front Royal, Virginia; the Anacostia Museum, which performs research and exhibit activities in the District of Columbia; a preservation, storage and air and spacecraft display facility in Suitland, 

Maryland; a natural preserve in Panama and one on the Chesapeake Bay; an oceanographic research facility in Fort Pierce, Florida; astrophysical stations in Cambridge, Massachusetts and Mt. 

Hopkins, Arizona and elsewhere; and supporting administrative, 

laboratory, and storage areas. 

145

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $420,960,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 434,660,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 436,660,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +15,700,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +2,000,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

146


Insert offset folio 030 HR564.030
147

The Committee recommends $436,660,000 for salaries and expenses, $2,000,000 above the budget request and $15,700,000 above 

the enacted level. The fiscal year 2003 request contains 

$11,000,000 in salaries and expenses and $2,000,000 in the construction account for security needs. The Committee has provided 

the $11,000,000 and moved the $2,000,000 from the construction 

request into the salaries and expenses account to be allocated in 

the following manner: $400,000 for the farm exhibit at the National 

Zoological Park, $750,000 to expand the current research at STRI 

on microorganisms in tropical forests and soils, and $11,850,000 to 

relieve operational shortfalls. 

The Committee recommends that the Smithsonian Institution 

continue to assist other professional organizations in their efforts 

to create museum exhibits commemorating and celebrating the various aspects and impacts of the Louisiana Purchase and its bicentennial on April 30, 2003. 

The Committee is concerned by recent controversial agreements 

between the Smithsonian Institution and certain benefactors which 

appear to cede undue control over Smithsonian exhibits to both corporate and individual donors. While it lauds the philanthropic intentions of these donors, it is concerned that a dominantly publicly 

funded organization must not compromise its duty to its core missions of education and research when seeking private sponsorships. 

While the Committee does not have enough information to render 

judgment on each of these public controversies, it considers the recent agreement to remove the name of Samuel P. Langley from the 

main theater complex of the National Air and Space Museum and 

replace it with that of a corporate sponsor to be particularly incomprehensible. Samuel Langley was a noted aviation pioneer and the 

Smithsonian’s third Secretary. No amount of money would seem 

adequate to justify denying him the recognition which he has enjoyed since the early 1980’s when the much visited theater was 

named in his honor. Unfortunately, while this case seems particularly difficult to understand, it is by no means the only such controversy and confidence in the Smithsonian by many Members of 

Congress and by the general public has been shaken by what some 

see as the selling of the institution to the highest bidder. In response to these concerns the Committee requests that the Regents 

undertake the following actions: 

1. Institute a procedure so that all benefactor or gift agreements 

which include stipulations or specific requirements with respect to 

the design of exhibits or naming of facilities or parts of facilities 

are approved by formal vote of the Regents in open sessions rather 

than through the current process of preliminary approval by the 

Secretary and the Executive Committee with ratification by the full 

Regents. 

2. Direct the Secretary to reopen negotiations with the donor corporation regarding the naming of the IMAX theatre at the National 

Air and Space Museum with the goal of returning the name of 

Samuel P. Langley to this complex. The Committee notes that this 

would not preclude recognition of the corporation for its generosity 

in some other way at the theater complex. The Committee notes 

that in making this request, it does not mean to imply opposition 

to appropriate recognition of donors through naming opportunities 

148

as a general principal, but believes this particular action should be 

reconsidered. 

3. Carry out a review of the Smithsonian’s policies regarding benefactor agreements and their applications in major gifts during the 

last 2 years and submit to the Committee not later than February 

1, 2003 a report of the Regents of their findings. 

The Committee is very concerned by the information on executive 

compensation at the Smithsonian provided to the Committee as 

part of the fiscal year 2003 hearings process. This data indicated 

that last year, a year in which the Smithsonian leadership was aggressively complaining about shortages of funds for critical maintenance problems, that it approved an increase in compensation for 

the Secretary of the Smithsonian of almost 50 percent to a level 

this year of more than $588,000 including a contractual bonus of 

$85,000. The Committee was further disturbed to learn that the 

Smithsonian, a taxpayer financed philanthropic and educational organization, pays 29 employees salaries in excess of those paid to 

cabinet officers of the U.S. Government. While the Committee recognizes the right under its charter for the Smithsonian to pay employees at any level with trust funds donated to it by the public, 

it is concerned that increases in executive compensation of this 

magnitude can weaken the public’s belief that the organization has 

justified its need for increased taxpayer support for its priority investments. The Regents are requested to carry-out a review of the 

Institution’s executive compensation policies and report to the 

Committee prior to February 1, 2003 the results of this review. 

REPAIR, RESTORATION AND ALTERATION OF FACILITIES

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $67,900,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 81,300,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 81,300,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +13,400,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends $81,300,000 for repair, restoration 

and alterations of facilities, the same as the budget request and 

$13,400,000 above the enacted level. 

The Committee urges the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution to repair and restore the Jacksonville Bandstand, which is currently located next to the National Museum of American History. 

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $30,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 12,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 10,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥20,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ ¥2,000,000 

The Committee recommends $10,000,000 for construction of the 

National Museum of the American Indian, $2,000,000 below the 

budget request (as explained in the previous account) and 

$20,000,000 below the enacted level.

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 milVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00148 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
149

lions 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, 2002 .............................................................. $71,115,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 78,219,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 78,219,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +7,104,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

150


Insert offset folio 031 HR564.031
151

The Committee recommends $78,219,000 for salaries and expenses of the National Gallery of Art, the same as the budget request and an increase of $7,104,000 above the 2002 level. Within 

the amount recommended there is a decrease of $2,119,000 for repair and maintenance and an increase of $2,119,000 to restore the 

special exhibits budget. The Committee notes that, even after the 

recommended decrease for repair and maintenance, there is an increase of 163 percent in funding for that activity compared with fiscal year 2002. 

The Committee stresses that level funding for special exhibits is 

critical for both 2003 exhibits and for multi-year exhibition planning. The Committee strongly believes that this special exhibitions 

funding should remain in the base budget in future years. 

REPAIR, RESTORATION AND RENOVATION OF BUILDINGS

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $14,220,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 16,230,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 16,230,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +2,010,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends $16,230,000 for repair, restoration 

and renovation of buildings at the National Gallery of Art, the 

same as the budget request and an increase of $2,010,000 above 

the fiscal year 2002 level. The increase above the 2002 level is to 

continue implementation of the Gallery’s long-term facilities improvement plan. 

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, 2002 .............................................................. $19,310,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 16,310,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 16,310,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥3,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $16,310,000 for operations and 

maintenance, the same as the budget request and $3,000,000 below 

the enacted level. 

CONSTRUCTION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $19,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 17,600,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 17,600,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥1,400,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $17,600,000 for construction, the 

same as the budget request and $1,400,000 below the enacted level. 

152

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 America and the world.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $7,796,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 8,488,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 8,488,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +692,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

The Committee recommends $8,488,000 for salaries and expenses, the same as the budget request and $692,000 above the enacted level. 

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES

NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS

GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $98,234,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 99,489,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 99,489,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +1,255,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0 

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

153


Insert offset folio 032 HR564.032
154

The Committee recommends $99,489,000 for grants and adminis- tration, an increase of $1,255,000 above the 2002 enacted level and 

equal to the budget request. The funding increase is to offset partially fixed cost increases. The Committee expects the NEA to use 

these grants to enhance outreach efforts to more of the Nation, especially for underserved rural and urban areas which have not had 

substantial NEA granting activity in the recent past. The Committee notes that the Challenge America Arts Fund is included 

under a separate heading and is recommended for $17,000,000 for 

fiscal year 2003. The Committee has not provided funding for an 

office move, so the Committee expects to see a supplemental budget 

request if the General Services Administration proceeds with such 

an action and additional funds are required. 

Bill language is recommended under Title III—General Provisions, retaining provisions in last year’s bill regarding restrictions 

on individual grants, subgranting, and seasonal support (Sec. 309); 

and authority to solicit and invest funds (Sec. 310); priority for 

rural and underserved communities, priority for grants that encourage public knowledge, education, understanding, and appreciation of the arts, designation of a category for grants of national significance, and a 15–percent cap on the total amount of grant funds 

directed to any one State (Sec. 311). 

NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE HUMANITIES

The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) was created 

in 1965 to encourage and support National progress in the humanities. The NEH provides, through a merit-based review process, 

grants in support of education, research, document and artifact 

preservation, and public service in the humanities. 

GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $108,832,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 109,632,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 109,932,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +1,550,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +300,000 

The amounts recommended by the Committee compared with the 

budget estimates by activity are shown in the following table:

155


Insert offset folio 033 HR564.033
156

The Committee recommends $109,932,000 for grants and administration, $1,550,000 above the 2002 level and $300,000 above the 

budget request. The Committee has included an increase above the 

request in order to enhance public service, education and communications through computer web-site design and implementation. 

The Committee has not provided funding for an office move, so the 

Committee expects to see a supplemental budget request if the 

General Services Administration proceeds with such an action and 

additional funds are required.

MATCHING GRANTS

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $16,122,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 16,122,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 16,122,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $16,122,000 for matching grants as 

requested and enacted in fiscal year 2002. The Committee notes 

that regional humanities centers are encouraged to participate in 

the endowment’s regular order granting processes rather than earmarking funds as was done in fiscal year 2002. 

INSTITUTE OF MUSEUM AND LIBRARY SERVICES

OFFICE OF MUSEUM SERVICES

GRANTS AND ADMINISTRATION

The Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS) was created in the Museum and Library Services Act of 1996 (Public Law 

104–208) which merged library services functions of the Department of Education into the Institute of Museum Services. These 

functions now come under the Office of Museum Services (OMS) 

portion of the IMLS. For fiscal year 2003 and thereafter, the Committee, as requested by the administration, recommends that funding for the OMS appropriation will be consolidated with the library 

functions of the IMLS and funding will be provided in the Labor, 

Health and Human Services, and Education appropriations bill. 

This simplification will enhance administrative efficiency and 

achieve synergy by uniting library and museum communities in 

common public service and educational efforts. 

CHALLENGE AMERICA ARTS FUND

CHALLENGE AMERICA GRANTS

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $17,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 17,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 17,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $17,000,000 for the Challenge 

America Arts Fund, as requested and enacted in fiscal year 2002. 

The fund, created in fiscal year 2001, provides grants for outreach 

activities of the National Endowment for the Arts. 

157

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

The Committee has modified bill language, requested by the Administration in Title III—General Provisions, concerning small 

grants and included the modified language under this heading. 

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, 2002 .............................................................. $1,254,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 1,224,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 1,255,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +31,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +31,000

The Committee recommends $1,255,000 for the Commission of 

Fine Arts, $31,000 above both the enacted and requested funding 

levels. This increase partially offsets fixed cost increases. The Committee encourages the Commission to work with Federal agencies 

and the District of Columbia government when those entities are 

designing new facilities, especially anti-terrorism related structures. The Commission should not wait for the final review to provide input. Recent experience demonstrates that early involvement 

not only leads to better final products, but also more timely implementation of important projects. 

NATIONAL CAPITAL ARTS AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $7,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 7,000,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 7,000,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... 0 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 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, the same as the budget request and the 2002 level. 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

The Committee rejects the administration’s proposal to repeal 

the authorization for this program and place this funding under 

the aegis of the District of Columbia Commission on Arts and Humanities. The Committee has examined this proposal closely and 

finds that it lacks merit. Accordingly, to prevent the further waste 

of agency staff time and resources on such poorly conceived notions, 

the Committee has included bill language which prevents any 

158

funds to be expended to examine proposals to alter the National 

Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs program. The sole exception is 

the Office of Management and Budget, which may spend its own 

funds on this matter if the office continues to feel such changes are 

worth pursuing despite clear Congressional disapproval. 

ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 established the 

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. The Advisory Council 

was reauthorized as part of the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands 

Management Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–333). The Council’s mandate is to further the National policy of preserving historic and cultural resources for the benefit of present and future generations. 

The Council advises the President and Congress on preservation 

matters and provides consultation on historic properties threatened 

by Federal action.

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $3,400,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 3,667,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 3,667,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +267,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $3,667,000 for the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, $267,000 above the 2002 level and equal 

to the budget request. The funding increase is to partially offset 

fixed cost increases. The Committee has not provided funding for 

an office move, so the Committee expects to see a supplemental 

budget request if the General Services Administration proceeds 

with such an action and additional funds are required. 

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, 2002 .............................................................. $8,011,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 7,253,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 7,553,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002, ................................................................... ¥458,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ +300,000

The Committee recommends $7,553,000, $300,000 above the 

budget request. The increase above the request is to offset partially 

fixed cost increases. The Committee notes that the 2002 enacted 

funding included a one-time emergency appropriation of $758,000 

to work on anti-terrorism planning. The Committee encourages the 

Commission to continue their close collaboration with Federal 

159

agencies and the District of Columbia government when they are 

designing new facilities, especially anti-terrorism related structures, and not wait for final review to provide input. Recent experience demonstrates that early involvement not only leads to better 

final products, but also more timely implementation of important 

projects. The Committee appreciates continued regular updates 

from the Commission concerning anti-terrorism structural improvement projects in the national capital region. 

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, 2002 .............................................................. $36,028,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 38,663,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 38,663,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... +2,635,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $38,663,000 for the Holocaust Memorial Museum, the same as the budget request and $2,635,000 

above the enacted level. 

PRESIDIO TRUST

PRESIDIO TRUST FUND

Appropriation enacted, 2002 .............................................................. $23,125,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ....................................................................... 21,327,000 

Recommended, 2003 ........................................................................... 21,327,000 

Comparison: 

Appropriation, 2002 .................................................................... ¥1,798,000 

Budget estimate, 2003 ................................................................ 0

The Committee recommends $21,327,000 for the Presidio Trust, 

the same as the budget request and $1,798,000 below the enacted 

level. 

In the four years that it has managed the Presidio, the Trust has 

made significant progress in achieving the key goals outlined in the 

Trust’s authorizing legislation: preserving natural resources, restoring historic buildings, improving recreational facilities, upgrading park infrastructure, and making the park financially self-sustaining by 2013. At this juncture in the Trust’s organizational evolution, the Committee directs the Trust to contract with the National Academy of Public Administration. The scope of work should 

focus on finance and business management practices, including financial assumptions and projections; a review of major capital conVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00159 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
160

struction projects; and the management and use of government 

loan authorities. 

TITLE III—GENERAL PROVISIONS 

Section 301 provides for public availability of information on consulting services contracts.

Section 302 prohibits activities to promote public support or opposition to legislative proposals. 

Section 303 provides for annual appropriations unless expressly 

provided otherwise in this Act. 

Section 304 limits the use of personal cooks, chauffeurs or servants. 

Section 305 limits assessments against programs without Committee approval. 

Section 306 limits the sale of giant sequoia. 

Section 307 continues a limitation on accepting and processing 

applications for patents and on the patenting of Federal lands; permits processing of grandfathered applications; and permits thirdparty contractors to process grandfathered applications. 

Section 308 limits payments for contract support costs in past 

years to the funds available in law and accompanying report language in those years for the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Service. 

Section 309 continues provision specifying reforms and limitations dealing with the National Endowment for the Arts. 

Section 310 continues a provision permitting the collection and 

use of private funds by the National Endowment for the Arts and 

the National Endowment for the Humanities. 

Section 311 continues direction to the National Endowment for 

the Arts on funding distribution. 

Section 312 continues a limitation on completing and issuing the 

five-year program under the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act. 

Section 313 continues a provision prohibiting the use of funds to 

support government-wide administrative functions unless they are 

justified in the budget process and approved by the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. 

Section 314 continues a provision which permits the Forest Service to use the roads and trails fund for backlog maintenance and 

priority forest health treatments. 

Section 315 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 316 continues a provision carried last year regulating the 

export of Western redcedar from National forest system lands in 

Alaska. 

Section 317 prohibits the Forest Service from using projects 

under the recreation fee demonstration program to supplant existing concessions. 

Section 318 clarifies the Forest Service land management planning revision requirements. 

Section 319 clarifies the requirement for mutually significant 

benefits when the Forest Service conducts cooperative agreements.

161

Section 320 continues a provision limiting preleasing, leasing and 

related activities within the boundaries of National monuments. 

Section 321 amends legislation to extend for one additional year 

the Forest Service’s authority for stewardship end result contracts. 

Section 322 makes a technical correction to the Cabin User Fee 

Fairness Act of 2000. 

Section 323 extends the Forest Service Conveyances Pilot Program. 

Section 324 deals with processing expired grazing permits by the 

Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service. This provision was carried in previous years for the Bureau of Land Management. This year it has been extended to the Forest Service. 

Section 325 provides authority for the staff of Congressionally established foundations to use GSA contract airfare rates and Federal government hotel accommodation rates when on official business. 

Section 326 authorizes a demonstration program for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe; which permits the Eagle Butte service unit 

to pay higher salaries and bonuses to attract health professionals, 

if they can do so at no additional cost. The tribe has reported that 

part-time contract employees currently are costing more than it 

would cost the tribe to hire full-time permanent employees under 

this demonstration program. 

Section 327 prohibits the transfer of funds to other agencies 

other than provided in this Act. 

Section 328 provides 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 329 continues a legislative provision which was in the fiscal year 2002 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. 

This provision limits funds for oil or 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 

Smithsonian Institution: Salaries and Expenses ................................ 14,100,000

TRANSFER 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 

transfer of funds provided in the accompanying bill.

APPROPRIATION TRANSFERS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

Account from which transfer is to be made Amount Account to which transfer is to be made Amount 

162

There are no specific appropriation transfers recommended in 

this bill. 

CHANGES IN APPLICATION OF EXISTING LAW

Pursuant to clause 3, rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the following Statements are submitted describing the 

effect of provisions in the accompanying bill, which directly or indirectly change the application of existing law. In most instances 

these provisions have been included in prior appropriations Acts. 

The bill provides that certain appropriations items remain available until expended or extends the availability of funds beyond the 

fiscal year where programs or projects are continuing in nature 

under the provisions of authorizing legislation but for which that 

legislation does not specifically authorize such extended availability. This authority tends to result in savings by preventing the 

practice of committing funds at the end of the fiscal year. 

The bill includes, in certain instances, limitations on the obligation of funds for particular functions or programs. These limitations include restrictions on the obligation of funds for administrative expenses, travel expenses, the use of consultants, and programmatic areas within the overall jurisdiction of a particular 

agency. 

The Committee has included limitations for official entertainment or reception and representation expenses for selected agencies in the bill. 

Language is included in the various parts of the bill to continue 

ongoing activities of those Federal agencies, which require annual 

authorization or additional legislation which to date, has not been 

enacted. 

Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, Management of lands and resources, permitting the use of receipts from 

the Land and Water Conservation Act of 1965; providing funds to 

the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation under certain conditions; permitting the use of fees from communication site rentals; 

limiting the use of funds for destroying wild horses and burros; and 

permitting the collection of fees for processing mining applications 

and for certain public land uses and permitting the use of these 

fees for program operations. 

Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, 

Wildland fire management, permitting the use of funds from other 

accounts for firefighting; permitting the use of funds for lodging 

and subsistence of firefighters; permitting the acceptance and use 

of funds for firefighting; permitting the use of grants contracts and 

cooperative agreements for hazardous fuels reduction, including 

cost-sharing and local assistance; permitting reimbursement to the 

Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service for consultation activities under the Endangered Species Act; 

and permitting the use of firefighting funds for the leasing of properties of the construction of facilities. 

Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, Central hazardous materials fund, providing that sums received from 

a party for remedial actions shall be credited to the account, and 

defining non-monetary payments. 

163

Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, Payments in lieu of taxes, to exclude any payment that is less than 

$100. 

Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, Oregon and California grant lands, authorizing the transfer of receipts to the Treasury. 

Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, Forest 

ecosystems health and recovery fund, permitting the use of salvage 

timber receipts. 

Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, Service charges, deposits, and forfeitures, allowing the use of funds on 

any damaged public lands. 

Language is included under Bureau of Land Management, Administrative provisions, permitting the payment of rewards for information on violations of law on Bureau lands and providing for 

cost-sharing arrangements for printing services. 

Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Resource management, allowing for the maintenance of 

the herd of long-horned cattle on the Wichita Mountains Wildlife 

Refuge. Without this language, the long-horned cattle would have 

to be removed from the refuge. Language also is included providing 

for the Natural Communities Conservation Planning program and 

for a Youth Conservation Corps; limiting funding for certain Endangered Species Act listing programs; permitting payment for information or rewards in the law enforcement program; and earmarking funds for contaminant analysis. 

Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Construction, permitting a single procurement for the expansion of the forensics laboratory in Oregon. 

Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Land acquisition, prohibiting the use of project funds for 

overhead expenses. 

Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Landowner incentive program, providing matching grants 

to States and territories. 

Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Stewardship grants, providing for grants for private conservation efforts. 

Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 

Service, North American wetlands conservation fund, limiting the 

use of funds above the 2001 funding level to U.S. projects. 

Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 

Service, State wildlife grants, specifying the distribution formula 

and planning and cost-sharing requirements and requiring that 

funds unobligated after two years be reapportioned.

Language is included under United States Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Administrative provisions, providing for repair of damage 

to public roads; providing options for the purchase of land not to 

exceed $1; providing for installation of certain recreation facilities; 

and permitting the maintenance and improvement of aquaria and 

other facilities, the acceptance of donated aircraft, and cost-shared 

arrangements for printing services. Language also is included limiting the use of funds for establishing new refuges. 

Language is included under National Park Service, Operation of 

the National park system, to allow road maintenance service to 

164

trucking permittees on a reimbursable basis. This provision has 

been included in annual appropriations Acts since 1954. Language 

also is included providing for a Youth Conservation Corps program; 

providing for the use of funds in support of Everglades land acquisition; permitting reimbursement to the Park Police for special 

events under limited circumstances; and limiting the use of funds 

for a new associate director position for law enforcement. 

Language is included under National Park Service, Historic preservation fund, providing a grant to the National Trust for Historic 

Preservation. 

Language is included under National Park Service, Land and water conservation fund, rescinding $30 million in contract authority. 

Language is included under National Park Service, Land acquisition and State assistance, permitting the use of funds to assist the 

State of Florida with Everglades restoration; making the use of 

funds for Everglades contingent on certain conditions; limiting the 

use of funds to establish a contingency fund for State grants; and 

clarifying Congressional intent with respect to land acquisition and 

flood protection in the ‘‘8.5 Square Mile Area’’. Language is included under National Park Service, Administrative provisions, requiring the inclusion of 18 U.S.C. 1913 in the text 

of grant and contract documents; preventing the implementation of 

an agreement for the redevelopment of the southern end of Ellis Island; limiting the use of funds for the United Nation’s Biodiversity 

Convention; permitting the use of funds for workplace safety needs; 

permitting the collection and use of funds for repair of utilities; and 

authorizing reimbursable agreements in advance of receipt of 

funds. 

Language is included under U.S. Geological Survey, Surveys, investigations and research, providing for two-year availability of 

funds for biological research and for the operations of cooperative 

research units; prohibiting the conduct of new surveys on private 

property without permission; and requiring cost sharing for cooperative topographic mapping and water resource data collection activities. 

Language is included under U.S. Geological Survey, Administrative provisions, permitting 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; and permitting the use of certain contracts, 

grants, and cooperative agreements. 

Language is included under Minerals Management Service, Royalty and offshore minerals management, permitting the use of excess receipts from Outer Continental Shelf leasing activities; providing for reasonable expenses related to volunteer beach and marine clean-up activities; providing for refunds for overpayments on 

Indian allottee leases; providing for collecting royalties and late 

payment interest on amounts received in settlements associated 

with Federal and Indian leases; and permitting the use of revenues 

from a royalty-in-kind program. 

Language is included under Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Regulation and Technology, permitting the 

use of moneys collected pursuant to assessment of civil penalties to 

165

reclaim lands affected by coal mining after August 3, 1977 and permitting payment to State and tribal personnel for travel and per 

diem expenses for training. 

Language is included under Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, Abandoned mine reclamation fund, limiting 

the amounts available for emergency reclamation projects; allowing 

the use of debt recovery to pay for debt collection; and earmarking 

funds for acid mine drainage. 

Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, Operation 

of Indian programs, limiting funds for contract support costs and 

for administrative cost grants for schools; permitting the use of 

tribal priority allocations for general assistance payments to individuals, for contract support costs, and for repair and replacement 

of schools; allowing changes to certain eligibility criteria by tribal 

governments, allowing the transfer of certain forestry funds; and 

providing for an Indian self-determination fund. 

Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, Construction, providing that 6 percent of Federal Highway Trust Fund contract authority may be used for management costs; providing for 

the transfer of Navajo irrigation project funds to the Bureau of Reclamation; providing Safety of Dams funds on a non-reimbursable 

basis; 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; and specifying the 

procedure for dispute resolution. 

Language is included under Bureau of Indian Affairs, Administrative provisions, prohibiting funding of Alaska schools; limiting 

the number of schools and the expansion of grade levels in individual schools; limiting the use of funds for contracts, grants and 

cooperative agreements; and requiring an evaluation of certain Bureau schools. 

Language is included under Departmental Offices, Insular Affairs, Assistance to Territories, requiring audits of the financial 

transactions of the Territorial governments by the General Accounting Office; providing grant funding under certain terms of the 

Agreement of the Special Representatives on Future United States 

Financial Assistance for the Northern Mariana Islands; providing 

a grant to the Close-Up foundation; allowing appropriations for disaster assistance to be used as non-Federal matching funds for hazard mitigation grants; providing for payments to the Prior Service 

Benefits Trust Fund and limiting administrative expenses; and 

providing for capital infrastructure in various Territories. 

Language is included under Departmental Offices, Departmental 

management, salaries and expenses, permitting payments to 

former Bureau of Mines workers. 

Language is included under Departmental Offices, Office of Special Trustee for American Indians, specifying that the statute of 

limitations shall not commence on any claim resulting from trust 

funds losses; exempting quarterly statements for accounts less than 

$1; requiring annual statements and records maintenance; and permitting the use of recoveries from erroneous payments. 

Language is included under Departmental Offices, Indian land 

consolidation, permitting transfers of funds for administration and 

166

permitting cooperative agreements with tribes to acquire fractional 

interests. 

Language is included under Departmental Offices, Administrative provisions, prohibiting the use of working capital or consolidated working funds to augment certain offices and allowing the 

acquisition of aircraft through various means and the sale of existing aircraft with proceeds used to offset the purchase price of replacement aircraft. 

Language is included under General Provisions, Department of 

the Interior, to allow transfer of funds in certain emergency situations and requiring replacement with a supplemental appropriation 

request and designating certain transferred funds as ‘‘emergency 

requirements’’ under the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 

Control Act of 1985. 

Language is included under General provisions, Department of 

the Interior, to permit the Department to consolidate services and 

receive reimbursement for said services. Language also is included 

providing for uniform allowances. 

Language is included under General provisions, Department of 

the Interior, to allow for obligations in connection with contracts 

issued for services or rentals for periods not in excess of 12 months 

beginning at any time during the fiscal year. 

Language is included under General provisions, Department of 

the Interior, restricting various oil and gas preleasing, leasing, exploration and drilling activities within the Outer Continental Shelf 

in the Georges Bank-North Atlantic planning area, Mid-Atlantic 

and South Atlantic planning area, Eastern Gulf of Mexico planning 

area, North Aleutian Basin planning area, Northern, Southern and 

Central California planning areas, and Washington/Oregon planning area. 

Language is included under General provisions, Department of 

the Interior, limiting the investment of Federal funds by Indian 

tribes; limiting the use of funds for contract support costs; and prohibiting fee exemptions for non-local traffic through National 

Parks. 

Language is included under General provisions, Department of 

the Interior, permitting the transfer of funds between the Bureau 

of Indian Affairs and the Office of Special Trustee for American Indians; providing permanent authority for negotiating agreements 

and leases at Fort Baker at the Golden Gate NRA and permitting 

the retention of receipts; providing for administrative law judges to 

handle Indian issues; permitting the redistribution of certain Indian funds with limitations; directing allocation of funds for Bureau of Indian Affairs funded post-secondary schools; limiting the 

use of the Huron Cemetery to religious and cultural activities; permitting the conveyance of the Twin Cities Research Center; extending for one year the transportation fee retention provision of the 

National Parks Omnibus Management Act of 1988; authorizing a 

cooperative agreement with the Golden Gate National Parks Association; permitting the Bureau of Land Management to retain 

funds from the sale of seeds and seedlings; permitting the sale of 

equipment and interests at the White River Oil Shale Mine in 

Utah and the retention of receipts; authorizing funding transfers 

for Shenandoah Valley Battlefield NHD and Ice Age NST; and proVerDate Jun 13 2002 19:56 Jul 15, 2002 Jkt 080696 PO 00000 Frm 00166 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR564.XXX pfrm17 PsN: HR564
167

hibiting the closure of the underground lunchroom at Carlsbad 

Caverns NP. 

Language is included under General Provision, Department of 

the Interior, prohibiting demolition of the bridge between New Jersey and Ellis Island; prohibiting posting of clothing optional signs 

at Canaveral NS; permitting the use of funds for incidental expenses related to the Centennial of the National Wildlife Refuge 

System; authorizing a cooperative agreement between the National 

Park Service and Capital Concerts; requiring delivery of a report 

to certain committees of Congress on an historical accounting of Indian trust funds for plaintiffs in the Cobell v. Norton litigation; 

limiting compensation for the Special Master and Court Monitor for 

the Cobell v. Norton litigation; requiring new Special Trustee Advisory Board appointees; allowing payment of attorney fees for Federal employees related to the Cobell v. Norton litigation; allowing 

Federal firefighting activities on non-Federal lands; extending the 

deadline for creation of a commission on a possible Museum of African American History and extending the availability of funds for 

this purpose; requiring that the Secretary of the Interior be a coequal partner on the Everglades RECOVER team; requiring the 

Fish and Wildlife Service to mark hatchery salmon; naming the 

Bitter Lake NWR, NM Vistor Center for Joseph R. Skeen; and establishing a commission to review Indian gaming. 

Language is included under Forest Service, State and private forestry, requiring House and Senate Appropriations Committee approval before releasing forest legacy project funds. 

Language is included under Forest Service, National forest system, allowing 50 percent of the fees collected under the Land and 

Water Conservation Fund Act to remain available until expended; 

requiring the fiscal year 2004 budget justification to display unobligated balances available at the start of fiscal year 2003; and permitting the transfer of funds to the Bureau of Land Management 

for wild horse and burro management. 

Language is included under Forest Service, Wildland fire management, allowing the use of funds to repay advances from other 

accounts and requiring 50 percent of any unobligated balances remaining at the end of fiscal year 2002, excepting hazardous fuels 

funding, to be transferred to the Knutson-Vandenberg Fund as repayment for past advances; permitting the use of funds for the 

Joint Fire Science program; providing for grants and cooperative 

agreements with local communities; providing for use of funds on 

adjacent, non-Federal lands for hazard reduction; providing contract authority for fuel reduction projects; and allowing transfer of 

funds for Endangered Species Act consultation. 

Language is included under Forest Service, Capital improvement 

and maintenance, allowing funds to be used for road decommissioning and requiring that no road decommissioning be funded 

until notice and an opportunity for public comment has been provided. 

Language is included under Forest Service, Range betterment 

fund, providing that 6 percent of the funds may be used for administrative expenses. 

Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative provisions, providing that proceeds from the sale of aircraft may be used 

to purchase replacement aircraft; permitting the transfer of funds 

168

for firefighting from other USDA account; allowing funds to be 

used through the Agency for International Development and the 

Foreign Agricultural Service for work in foreign countries and to 

support other forestry activities outside of the United States. 

Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative provisions, prohibiting the following without advance approval: (1) the 

transfer of funds under the Department of Agriculture transfer authority; (2) reprogramming of funds; and (3) transfer of funds in excess of the level transferred during fiscal year 2000 to the working 

capital fund of the Department of Agriculture. 

Language is included under Forest Service, Administrative provisions, providing for a Youth Conservation Corps program; providing 

for matching funds and administrative expenses for the National 

Forest Foundation and also matching funds for the National Fish 

and Wildlife Foundation; providing funds for sustainable rural development; permitting the transfer of certain funds to the State of 

Washington fish and wildlife department for planned projects; providing payments to counties within the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area; providing authority to the Pinchot Institute for 

activities at Grey Towers National Historic Landmark; allowing 

payments to Del Norte County, CA; permitting limited reimbursements to the Office of General Counsel in USDA; and allowing the 

limited use of funds for law enforcement emergencies. 

Language is included under Department of Energy, Clean coal 

technology deferring certain funding for one year. 

Language is included under Department of Energy, Fossil energy, specifying certain conditions for the Clean Coal Power Initiative; limiting the field testing of nuclear explosives for the recovery 

of oil and gas; and permitting the use of funds from other programs 

accounts for the National Energy Technology Laboratory. 

Language is included under Department of Energy, Naval Petroleum and oil shale reserves, permitting the use of unobligated balances. 

Language is included under the Department of Energy, Energy 

conservation, providing allocations of grants for weatherization and 

State energy conservation. 

Language is included under Administrative provisions, Department of Energy, providing for vehicle and guard services and uniform allowances; limiting programs of price supports and loan 

guarantees to what is provided in appropriations Acts; providing 

for the transfer of funds to other agencies of the Government; providing for retention of revenues by the Secretary of Energy on certain projects; requiring certain contracts be submitted to Congress 

prior to implementation; prohibiting issuance of procurement documents without appropriations; and permitting the use of contributions and fees for cooperative projects. 

Language is included under Indian Health Service, Indian health 

services, providing that certain contracts and grants may be performed in two fiscal years; exempting certain tribal funding from 

fiscal year constraints; limiting funds for catastrophic care, loan repayment and certain contracts; capping contract support cost 

spending; providing for use of collections under Title IV of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act; and permitting the use of Indian Health Care Improvement Fund monies for facilities improvement. 

169

Language is included under Indian Health Service, Indian health 

facilities, providing that funds may be used to purchase land, modular buildings and trailers; providing for certain staff quarters construction in Alaska; providing for certain purchases and for a demolition fund; providing authority for contracts for small ambulatory 

facilities; and providing for the transfer of land to IHS on St. Paul 

Island, AK. 

Language is included under Indian Health Service, Administrative provisions, providing for payments for telephone service in private residences in the field, purchase of reprints, and purchase and 

erection of portable buildings and allowing deobligation and reobligation of funds applied to self-governance funding agreements. 

Language is included under Indian Health Service, Administrative provisions, providing that health care may be extended to nonIndians at Indian Health Service facilities and providing for expenditure of funds transferred to IHS from the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development. 

Language is included under Indian Health Service, Administrative provisions, preventing the Indian Health Service from billing 

Indians in order to collect from third-party payers until Congress 

has agreed to implement a specific policy. 

Language is included under Indian Health Service, Administrative provisions, allowing payment of expenses for meeting attendance; specifying that certain funds shall not be subject to certain 

travel limitations; prohibiting the expenditure of funds to implement new eligibility regulations; providing that funds be apportioned only in the appropriation structure in this Act; prohibiting 

changing the appropriations structure without approval of the Appropriations Committees; and permitting the sale of goods and 

services for fees and for the use of those fees. 

Language is included under Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation, Salaries and expenses, defining eligible relocatees; prohibiting movement of any single Navajo or Navajo family unless a new 

or replacement home is available; limiting relocatees to one new or 

replacement home; and establishing a priority for relocation of 

Navajos to those certified eligible who have selected and received 

homesites on the Navajo reservation or selected a replacement residence off the Navajo reservation. 

Language is included under Institute of American Indian and 

Alaska Native Culture and Arts Development, Payment to the Institute, earmarking funds for the Library Technology Center. 

Language is included under Smithsonian Institution, Salaries 

and expenses, allowing for advance payments to independent contractors performing research services or participating in official 

Smithsonian presentations; providing that funds may be used to 

support American overseas research centers; permitting the use of 

certain funds for the Victor Building; and rescinding prior year 

funds. 

Language is included under Smithsonian Institution, repair, restoration and alteration of facilities, permitting the Smithsonian Institution to select contractors for certain purposes on the basis of 

contractor qualifications as well as price and earmarking funds for 

the National Zoo. 

Language is included under Smithsonian Institution, Administrative provisions, precluding any changes to the Smithsonian science 

170

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; and limiting reprogramming of funds 

and the use of funds for the Holt House. 

Language is included under National Gallery of Art, Salaries and 

expenses, allowing payment in advance for membership in library, 

museum, and art associations or societies; providing uniform allowances and for restoration and repair of works of art by contract 

without advertising; and providing no-year availability of funds for 

special exhibitions. 

Language is included under National Gallery of Art, Repair, restoration and renovation of buildings, permitting the Gallery to perform work by contract or otherwise and to select contractors for 

certain purposes on the basis of contractor qualifications as well as 

price. 

Language is included under National Foundation for the Humanities, Matching grants, allowing obligation of current and prior year 

funds of gifts, bequests, and devises of money for which equal 

amounts have not previously been appropriated. 

Language is included under National Foundation on the Arts and 

the Humanities, Administrative provisions, requiring certain language in contracts and grants permitting the use of non-appropriated funds for reception expenses, and allowing the chairperson 

of the NEA to approve small grants under limited circumstances. 

Language is included under Commission of Fine Arts, Salaries 

and expenses, permitting the charging and use of fees for its publications. 

Language is included under Commission of Fine Arts, National 

Capital Arts and Cultural Affairs limiting the use of funds to study 

the alteration or transfer of this program. 

Language is included under Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Salaries and expenses, restricting hiring anyone at Executive Level V or higher. 

Language is included under National Capital Planning Commission, Salaries and expenses, providing a pay level at the rate of Executive Level IV for all appointed members. 

Language is included under Holocaust Memorial Council, providing no year funding availability for repair and rehabilitation 

and museums exhibitions. 

Language is included under Title III—General provisions, providing for availability of information on consulting services contracts; prohibiting the use of funds to distribute literature either to 

promote or oppose legislative proposals on which Congressional action is incomplete; prohibiting the use of funds to provide personal 

cooks, chauffeurs or other personal servants to any office or employee; specifying that funds are for one year unless provided otherwise; prohibiting assessments against programs funded in this 

bill; and prohibiting the sale of giant sequoia trees in a manner different from 2002. 

Language is included under Title III—General provisions, continuing a limitation on accepting and processing applications for 

patents and on the patenting of Federal lands; permitting processing of grandfathered applications; and permitting third-party 

contractors to process grandfathered applications.

171

Language is included under Title III—General provisions, limiting the use of funds for contract support costs on Indian contracts. 

Language is included under Title III—General provisions, making reforms in the National Endowment for the Arts, including 

funding distribution reforms; permitting the National Endowments 

for the Arts and the Humanities to collect, invest and use private 

donations; limiting funds for completing or issuing the five-year 

program under the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources 

Planning Act; limiting the use of funds for any government-wide 

administrative functions; permitting the use of Forest Service road 

and trail funds for maintenance and forest health; limiting the use 

of telephone answering machines; and limiting the sale for export 

of western red cedar in Alaska. 

Language is included under Title III—General Provisions, prohibiting the Forest Service from using projects under the recreation 

fee demonstration program to supplant existing concessions and 

permitting the use of Forest land management plans pending completion of required revisions. 

Language is included under Title III—General Provisions, clarifying the requirement for mutually significant benefits when the 

Forest Service conducts cooperative agreements; limiting leasing 

and preleasing activities within National Monuments; extending 

the authority for Forest Service stewardship and results contracts; 

making a technical correction to the Cabin User Fee Fairness Act 

of 2000; 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 for processing expired grazing permits by the Bureau of Land Management 

and the Forest Service; providing authority for the staff of Congressionally established foundations to use GSA contract airfare rates 

and Federal government hotel accommodation rates when on official business; authorizing a demonstration program for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, which permits the Eagle Butte service unit 

to pay higher salaries and bonuses to attract health professionals; 

prohibiting the transfer of funds to other agencies other than provided in this Act; 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; and limiting the use of funds to prepare or issue a permit or lease for oil or gas drilling in the Finger Lakes National Forest, NY. 

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] 

Last year of authorization Authorization level 

Appropriations in 

last year of authorization 

Appropriations in 

this bill 

National Endowment for the Arts .......................... 1993 ‘‘Such sums as 

may be necessary’’.

$174,460 $116,489 

172

[Dollars in thousands] 

Last year of authorization Authorization level 

Appropriations in 

last year of authorization 

Appropriations in 

this bill 

National Endowment for the Humanities .............. 1993 ‘‘Such sums as 

may be necessary’’.

177,413 126,054 

Office of Navajo & Hopi Indian Relocation ........... 2000 $30,000 ................. 8,000 14,491

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Resources Management: 

Endangered Species Act Amendments of 

1988.

1992 $41,500 ................. 35,721 130,244

Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments 

of 1994.

1999 $10,296 ................. 2,008 2,453

Department of Energy

Energy Information Administration ........................ 1992 NA .......................... 76,300 80,611 

Office of Fossil Energy: 

Coal ............................................................... 1997 ‘‘Such sums as 

may be necessary’’.

149,629 207,700 

Enhanced Oil Recovery ................................. 1997 NA .......................... 45,937 44,400 

Natural Gas ................................................... 1997 NA .......................... 23,614 48,190 

Fuel Cells ...................................................... 1997 NA .......................... 50,117 71,000 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy: 

Transportation R&D ...................................... 1994 $160,000 ............... 176,000 273,864 

Buildings, Industry ........................................ 1994 $275,000 ............... 255,700 562,152 

The Committee notes that authorizing legislation for many of 

these programs is in various stages of the legislative process and 

these authorizations are expected to be enacted into law later this 

year. 

STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House 

of Representatives, the following is a statement of general performance goals and objectives for which this measure authorizes funding: 

The Committee on Appropriations considers program performance, including a program’s success in developing and attaining 

outcome-related goals and objectives, in developing funding recommendations. 

FULL COMMITTEE VOTES

Pursuant to the provisions of clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the House 

of Representatives, the results of each roll call vote on an amendment or on the motion to report, together with the names of those 

voting for and those voting against, are printed below: there were 

no recorded votes. 

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 italic, 

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

173

SECTION 412(b) OF THE NATIONAL PARKS OMNIBUS ACT 

OF 1988 

(16 U.S.C. 5961(b)) is amended as follows: 

(b) OBLIGATION OF FUNDS.—Notwithstanding any other provision 

of law, with respect to a service contract for the provision solely of 

transportation services at Zion National Park, the Secretary may 

obligate the expenditure of fees received in fiscal year ø2002¿ 2003

under section 501 before the fees are received. 

SECTION 124(a) OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE 

INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES ACT, 1997 

(16 U.S.C. 1011(a)) is amended as follows: 

(a) IN GENERAL.—For fiscal year 1997 and thereafter, appropriations made for the Bureau of Land Management, including appropriations for the Wildland Fire Management account allocated to 

the National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, may be used by the Secretary of the Interior 

for the purpose of entering into cooperative agreements with the 

heads of other Federal agencies, tribal, State, and local governments, private and nonprofit entities, and landowners for the protection, restoration, and enhancement of fish and wildlife habitat 

and other resources on public and private lands and the reduction 

of risk from natural disaster where public safety threatened that 

benefit these resources on public lands within the watershed. 

SECTION 347 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999 

STEWARDSHIP END RESULT CONTRACTING DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

SEC. 374 (a) IN GENERAL.— Until September 30, ø2004¿ 2005, 

the Forest Service may enter into, via agreement or contract as appropriate, no more than twenty-eight (28) stewardship contracting 

demonstration pilot projects with private persons or other public or 

private entities, of which Region One of the Forest Service shall 

have the authority to enter into nine (9) such contracts, to perform 

services to achieve land management goals for the national forests 

that meet local and rural community needs. 

SECTION 329 OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2002 

SEC. 329. (a) * * * 

(b) LIMITATION.— Conveyances on not more than ø10¿ 20 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 of Representatives and the Committee 

on Appropriations of the Senate in advance of each conveyance. 

(d) DURATION OF AUTHORITY.— The authority provided by this 

section expires on September 30, ø2005¿ 2006.

SECTION 608 OF THE CABIN USER FEE FAIRNESS ACT 

OF 2000 

SEC. 608. ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT OF CABIN USER FEE. 

(a) * * * 

174

(b) INITIAL INDEX.— (1) * * * 

(2) STATEWIDE CHANGES.— In determining the annual adjustment to the cabin user fee for an authorization located in 

a county in which agricultural land prices are influenced by 

the øvalue influences¿ criteria described in øsection 606(b)(3)¿

section 606(b)(2), the Secretary shall use average statewide 

changes in the State in which the lot is located. 

FIVE-YEAR PROJECTION OF OUTLAYS

In compliance with section 308(a)(1)(B) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, the following 

table contains five-year projections associated with the budget authority provided in the accompanying bill:

(In millions) 

Budget authority (discretionary) .......................................................... 19,730

Outlays: 

Fiscal year 2003 .............................................................................. 12,461

Fiscal year 2004 .............................................................................. 4,400

Fiscal year 2005 .............................................................................. 1,700

Fiscal year 2006 .............................................................................. 756

Fiscal year 2007 and future years ................................................ 402

ASSISTANCE TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS

In accordance with section 308(a)(1)(C) of the Congressional 

Budget Act of 1974 (Public Law 93–344), as amended, the financial 

assistance to State and local governments is as follows:

(In millions) 

New budget authority ............................................................................ 2,744

Fiscal year 2003 outlays resulting therefrom ...................................... 1,513

175


Insert offset folio 035 here HR564.034
176


Insert offset folio 036 here HR564.035
177


Insert offset folio 037 here HR564.036
178


Insert offset folio 038 here HR564.037
179


Insert offset folio 039 here HR564.038
180


Insert offset folio 040 here HR564.039
181


Insert offset folio 041 here HR564.040
182


Insert offset folio 042 here HR564.041
183


Insert offset folio 042 here HR564.041
184


Insert offset folio 043 here HR564.042
185


Insert offset folio 044 here HR564.043
186


Insert offset folio 045 here HR564.044
187


Insert offset folio 046 here HR564.045
188


Insert offset folio 047 here HR564.046
189


Insert offset folio 048 here HR564.047
190


Insert offset folio 049 here HR564.048
(191)

MINORITY VIEWS OF THE HONORABLE NORMAN DICKS 

AND DAVID OBEY 

In submitting these views, the Minority wishes to express its appreciation for the cooperative and bi-partisan manner in which the 

Interior Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2003 has been handled 

by the Chairman and the Majority. The Minority has been consulted throughout the process and believes that its views are reflected in many aspects of the bill. While we do not agree with 

every recommendation and continue to work for improvements in 

certain areas, in its entirety we believe that the Interior bill is one 

which Members from both parties can support. 

In expressing our support for a fair bill which addresses the 

highest priorities within a constrained budget allocation, the Minority does not mean to leave the impression that we believe this 

bill fully addresses the natural resource and human needs which 

are addressed by agencies within the Interior Subcommittee’s jurisdiction. In fact, the $19,730 million allocation for 2003, while almost $900 million above the president’s request, is only 2.8 percent 

above the 2002 spending levels—an increase barely able to keep up 

with inflation. Nonetheless, the allocation has allowed the Committee to restore most of the cuts proposed in the Bush budget, especially those poorly justified reductions for energy research, forest 

fire prevention and preparedness, natural resource science at the 

U.S. Geological Survey and programs for urban parks. 

There are also important increases. These include $20 million for 

the weatherization program, which is funded at $250 million. This 

program has been increased by $98 million over the last two years 

and the increased funding will lead to significant savings in energy 

as additional homes, schools and hospitals are insulated. It is critical to lower income families who often live in poorly insulated 

houses and who have seen the cost of heating double in the last 

year. There are also important increases for the land management 

agencies, especially the Fish and Wildlife Service which celebrates 

its 100th anniversary and the Minority was particularly pleased to 

see the $99 million increase over the request for Indian schools and 

Indian health programs. While far less than they need, it is a good 

recommendation given the allocation. 

The Minority is pleased to join with the Majority in support of 

the sections of this bill which fully fund the new Conservation 

Trust Fund created two years ago by the Congress (title VIII of the 

Fiscal Year 2001 Interior Appropriations Act.). This new funding 

structure was created as our commitment to significant increases 

for preservation of this country’s natural and cultural resources. It 

expands programs which support critical land acquisition where 

lands are threatened by development, accelerates efforts to deal 

with maintenance needs of our parks, refuges and forests, enhances 

efforts to protect wildlife, and expands federal support for other 

192

conservation and preservation needs. By providing the full $1,440 

million authorized this year for conservation programs in the Interior bill, the Congress maintains its commitment to the $12 billion 

in funding anticipated over the first six years of this initiative. This 

is roughly twice the amount which would likely have been provided 

under previous financing structures. 

The Minority was especially pleased that the Committee adopted 

on a bi-partisan basis an amendment adding $700 million in critically needed fiscal year 2002 supplemental funding to fight the catastrophic fires burning in many of the Western States. The 2002 

fire season is shaping up to be one of the worst in recent memory. 

At the beginning of July more than 3 million acres have burned, 

almost triple the average for this time of year. We believe the failure of the executive branch to request adequate funding for this 

emergency is irresponsible and we are pleased that the Committee 

has responded by adding to the bill the supplemental funding 

which will clearly be needed. 

While we have in these views attempted to indicate the many 

areas in which we are supportive of the bill, we must, however, express our consternation regarding the decision by the Committee to 

hold down funding for America’s cultural agencies—the National 

Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for 

the Humanities (NEH). These agencies, which finance the country’s 

small but critical efforts in support of cultural education and preservation, were cut by more than 40 percent in 1995 and, despite 

some progress in the last two years, for the most part have yet to 

recover. The NEA is funded in this bill at a level of $116.5 million, 

$46 million below the 1995 level and in real dollars a reduction of 

almost one-third. The funding for the National Endowment for the 

Humanities is similarly inadequate in this bill. 

Last year, when the House considered the FY 2002 Interior bill, 

it approved a bi-partisan amendment to begin restoring federal 

support for these cultural agencies. The House at that time voted 

221 to 193 in favor of adding $10 million to the NEA and $5 million to the NEH, the first increase to win final approval on a roll 

call vote since 1994. The Minority believes that this vote was a 

turning point in which the full House declared an end to the fight 

over federal funding for the arts and humanities begun in the early 

1990’s. It did so first because of the quality and the public support 

for these programs. But, it also did so because it accepted that the 

reforms instituted by the Congress had successfully dealt with the 

concerns of many in the public about federal support for controversial projects. These reforms include a significant broadening of 

grant support to more States and communities, an expanded and 

more publicly responsive advisory council, and controls to limit 

funding for controversial programs. The Minority will continue to 

look for sources of additional funding for our cultural agencies as 

the bill moves to the House floor. 

There are other areas beyond the cultural agencies where the Minority would support additional funds. In particular Indian health 

and education are high priority areas which need increased resources. But, as stated at the beginning of these views, we believe 

this legislation in balance is a good bill produced through an open 

193

and bi-partisan process. We believe it deserves an ‘‘aye’’ vote at 

final passage. 

NORM DICKS. DAVID OBEY.

Æ