# Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3ARL34461 ## Record - **Collection:** Congressional research report - **Document type:** CRS Report - **Published:** May 29, 2009 - **Citation:** RL34461 ## Text Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations (name redacted), Coordinator Specialist in Natural Resources Policy May 29, 2009 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov RL34461 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Summary The Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bill includes funding for the Department of the Interior (DOI), except for the Bureau of Reclamation, and for two agencies within other departments—the Forest Service within the Department of Agriculture and the Indian Health Service (IHS) within the Department of Health and Human Services. It also includes funding for arts and cultural agencies, the Environmental Protection Agency, and numerous other entities. On February 17, 2009, the President signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5, H.R. 1). This broad economic stimulus legislation contained $10.95 billion in emergency funds for FY2009 for some of the accounts within agencies typically funded by the annual Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations laws. In general, the funds were made available for obligation until September 30, 2010 (the end of FY2010). On March 11, 2009, the President signed the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L. 111-8, H.R. 1105). The omnibus law contained regular appropriations for FY2009 of $27.59 billion for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. This funding was $825.9 million (3%) below the FY2008 level of $28.42 billion (including $1.82 billion in emergency appropriations), but $1.78 billion (7%) above the FY2009 Bush Administration request of $25.81 billion. Together with funding in the stimulus law, Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies received a total of $38.54 billion for FY2009. Regular appropriations for FY2009 were not enacted for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies before the October 1, 2008, start of the fiscal year. Instead, agencies were receiving funds under the terms of a continuing funding resolution—Division A, Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2009 (P.L. 110-329, FY2009 CR). The measure generally extended funding for accounts in the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill at the amounts provided in the FY2008 regular appropriations law and under the terms and conditions provided in that FY2008 law. A notable exception was that the FY2009 CR removed the prohibitions on spending funds for oil and gas leasing activities in certain regions of the Outer Continental Shelf. No bills providing regular appropriations for FY2009 for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies were reported by the House or Senate Appropriations Committees or considered on the House or Senate floor during the 110th Congress. Perhaps the biggest impediment to developing and considering an Interior bill was divisiveness over whether to retain long-standing prohibitions on funding for oil and gas leasing in the OCS. Other issues that have been controversial in Interior deliberations have included funding for Bureau of Indian Affairs construction, education, and housing; Indian Health Service construction and urban Indian health; wastewater/drinking water needs; land acquisition; the Payments in Lieu of Taxes program; the Superfund program; and wildland fire fighting, in addition to Indian trust fund management and royalty relief. This report is not expected to be updated. Congressional Research Service Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Contents Most Recent Developments ............................................................................................................. 1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 1 FY2004-FY2009........................................................................................................................ 2 Current Overview ...................................................................................................................... 3 Economic Stimulus Legislation, P.L. 111-5............................................................................... 4 Major Issues............................................................................................................................... 9 Status of Bill ............................................................................................................................ 10 Title I: Department of the Interior.................................................................................................. 11 Bureau of Land Management .................................................................................................. 11 Overview ........................................................................................................................... 11 Management of Lands and Resources ............................................................................... 12 Construction ...................................................................................................................... 14 Land Acquisition ............................................................................................................... 14 Fish and Wildlife Service ........................................................................................................ 14 Endangered Species Funding ............................................................................................ 15 National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) and Law Enforcement .................................. 17 Refuges: Stimulus Funding .............................................................................................. 17 Construction ...................................................................................................................... 18 Avian Flu ........................................................................................................................... 18 Land Acquisition ............................................................................................................... 18 Wildlife Refuge Fund ........................................................................................................ 19 Multinational Species and Neotropical Migrants .............................................................. 20 State and Tribal Wildlife Grants ........................................................................................ 20 National Park Service .............................................................................................................. 21 Operation of the National Park System ............................................................................. 23 United States Park Police (USPP) ..................................................................................... 24 Centennial Challenge ........................................................................................................ 24 National Recreation and Preservation ............................................................................... 25 Historic Preservation ......................................................................................................... 25 Construction ...................................................................................................................... 26 Land Acquisition and State Assistance .............................................................................. 26 U.S. Geological Survey ........................................................................................................... 27 Enterprise Information ...................................................................................................... 28 Geographic Research, Investigations, and Remote Sensing ............................................. 28 Geologic Hazards, Resources, and Processes ................................................................... 29 Water Resources Investigations......................................................................................... 29 Biological Research........................................................................................................... 29 Science Support and Facilities .......................................................................................... 30 Global Climate Change Research...................................................................................... 30 Minerals Management Service ................................................................................................ 31 Budget and Appropriations................................................................................................ 31 Oil and Gas Leasing Offshore ........................................................................................... 32 Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement ....................................................... 34 Bureau of Indian Affairs .......................................................................................................... 37 Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) Programs .................................................................... 40 Law Enforcement and Courts Program ............................................................................. 42 Congressional Research Service Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Housing Improvement Program (HIP) .............................................................................. 42 Road Maintenance ............................................................................................................. 43 Federal Tribal Acknowledgment Process .......................................................................... 43 Departmental Offices and Department-Wide Programs .......................................................... 44 Office of Insular Affairs .................................................................................................... 44 Payments in Lieu of Taxes Program (PILT) ...................................................................... 45 Office of Special Trustee for American Indians ............................................................... 47 National Indian Gaming Commission .............................................................................. 51 Title II: Environmental Protection Agency .................................................................................... 51 Key Funding Issues ................................................................................................................. 54 Wastewater and Drinking Water Infrastructure ................................................................. 54 Superfund .......................................................................................................................... 56 Brownfields ....................................................................................................................... 58 Leaking Underground Storage Tanks ................................................................................ 59 Air Quality ........................................................................................................................ 60 Policy Provisions ............................................................................................................... 62 Title III: Related Agencies ............................................................................................................. 63 Department of Agriculture: Forest Service .............................................................................. 63 Major FS Issues in Appropriations .................................................................................... 63 State and Private Forestry.................................................................................................. 64 FS Research ....................................................................................................................... 66 National Forest System ..................................................................................................... 66 Capital Improvement and Maintenance ............................................................................ 66 Land Acquisition ............................................................................................................... 67 Department of Health and Human Services: Indian Health Service ...................................... 67 Health Services.................................................................................................................. 69 Facilities ............................................................................................................................ 72 Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation ......................................................................... 73 Smithsonian Institution ............................................................................................................ 74 Salaries and Expenses ....................................................................................................... 75 Facilities Capital................................................................................................................ 75 Legacy Fund ...................................................................................................................... 75 Trust Funds ........................................................................................................................ 76 National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities .................. 76 NEA................................................................................................................................... 77 NEH................................................................................................................................... 78 Cross-Cutting Topics ..................................................................................................................... 78 Everglades Restoration ............................................................................................................ 78 FY2009 Funding ............................................................................................................... 79 Concerns Over Phosphorus Mitigation ............................................................................. 81 The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)................................................................... 82 Overview ........................................................................................................................... 82 Land Acquisition ............................................................................................................... 82 Grants to States.................................................................................................................. 83 Other Purposes .................................................................................................................. 84 Wildland Fire Management ..................................................................................................... 85 Wildfire Suppression ......................................................................................................... 87 Fire Preparedness .............................................................................................................. 87 Other Operations ............................................................................................................... 87 Congressional Research Service Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Emergency Supplemental and Contingent Appropriations, FY2008 ................................ 88 Figures Figure 1. FS FY2009 Appropriations Excluding Stimulus Funding.............................................. 64 Tables Table 1. Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations, FY2004 to FY2009 ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Table 2. Appropriations for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies in P.L. 111-5 ................ 7 Table 3. Status of Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations, FY2009 (H.R. 1105) ................................................................................................................................. 10 Table 4. Appropriations for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), FY2008-FY2009 ............ 12 Table 5. Appropriations for the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), FY2008-FY2009 ................... 15 Table 6. Appropriations for the Endangered Species Program and Related Programs, FY2008-FY2009 ......................................................................................................................... 16 Table 7. Appropriations for the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS): Land Acquisition Program, FY2008-FY2009 ......................................................................................................... 19 Table 8. Appropriations for the Multinational Species Conservation Fund (MSCF) and Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Fund, FY2008-FY2009 ........................................... 20 Table 9. Appropriations for State and Tribal Wildlife Grants, FY2008-FY2009........................... 21 Table 10. Appropriations for the National Park Service (NPS), FY2008-FY2009 ........................ 23 Table 11. Appropriations for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), FY2008-FY2009 .................. 28 Table 12. Appropriations for the Minerals Management Service (MMS), FY2008FY2009 ....................................................................................................................................... 31 Table 13. Appropriations for the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, FY2008-FY2009 ......................................................................................................................... 35 Table 14. Appropriations for the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) (including Bureau of Indian Education (BIE)), FY2008-FY2009 ................................................................................ 38 Table 15. Authorized and Appropriated Levels for Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT), FY2000-FY2009 ......................................................................................................................... 46 Table 16. Appropriations for the Office of Special Trustee for American Indians (OST), FY2008-FY2009 ......................................................................................................................... 47 Table 17. Appropriations for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), FY2008FY2009 ....................................................................................................................................... 53 Table 18. Appropriations for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Brownfields Program, FY2008-FY2009 ......................................................................................................... 59 Table 19. Appropriations for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Selected Air Quality Programs and Activities, FY2008-FY2009 ................................................................... 61 Table 20. Appropriations for the Forest Service (FS), FY2008-FY2009 ....................................... 63 Congressional Research Service Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Table 21. Appropriations for the Forest Service (FS): State and Private Forestry, FY2008FY2009 ....................................................................................................................................... 65 Table 22. Appropriations for the Indian Health Service (IHS), FY2008-FY2009 ......................... 68 Table 23. Appropriations for the Smithsonian Institution, FY2008-FY2009 ................................ 76 Table 24. Appropriations for the Arts and Humanities, FY2008-FY2009 ..................................... 77 Table 25. Appropriations for the Department of the Interior (DOI): Everglades Restoration Budget, FY2008-FY2009 ........................................................................................ 80 Table 26. Appropriations for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), FY2004-FY2009 ......................................................................................................................... 82 Table 27. Appropriations for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF): Other Programs, FY2006-FY2009 ....................................................................................................... 84 Table 28. Appropriations for the Forest Service (FS) and the Department of the Interior (DOI): Wildland Fire Management, FY2007-FY2009 ............................................................... 86 Table 29. Appropriations for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, FY2004-FY2009 ......................................................................................................................... 90 Contacts Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 93 Key Policy Staff ............................................................................................................................. 93 Congressional Research Service Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Most Recent Developments On March 11, 2009, the President signed the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L. 111-8, H.R. 1105). The omnibus law contained regular appropriations for FY2009 of $27.59 billion for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. In earlier action, on February 17, 2009, the President signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5, H.R. 1). This broad economic stimulus legislation contained $10.95 billion in emergency funds for FY2009 for some of the accounts within agencies typically funded by the annual Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations laws. Taken together, the two laws provided a total of $38.54 billion for FY2009. Introduction The annual Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bill includes funding for agencies and programs in three separate federal departments, as well as numerous related agencies and bureaus. It provides funding for Department of the Interior (DOI) agencies (except for the Bureau of Reclamation, funded in Energy and Water Development appropriations laws), many of which manage land and other natural resource or regulatory programs. The bill also provides funds for agencies in two other departments—the Forest Service in the Department of Agriculture, and the Indian Health Service (IHS) in the Department of Health and Human Services—as well as funds for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Further, the annual bill includes funding for arts and cultural agencies, such as the Smithsonian Institution, National Endowment for the Arts, and National Endowment for the Humanities, and for numerous other entities and agencies. In former years, the appropriations laws for Interior and Related Agencies provided funds for several activities within the Department of Energy (DOE), including research, development, and conservation programs; the Naval Petroleum Reserves; and the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. However, at the outset of the 109th Congress, these DOE programs were transferred to the House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees covering energy and water, to consolidate jurisdiction over DOE.1 At the same time, jurisdiction over the EPA and several smaller entities was moved to the House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees covering Interior and Related Agencies.2 This change resulted from the abolition of the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development, and Independent Agencies, which previously had jurisdiction over EPA. Since FY2006, appropriations laws for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies have contained three primary titles. This report is organized along these lines. Accordingly, the first section (Title I) provides information on Interior agencies; the second section (Title II) discusses EPA; and the third section (Title III) addresses other agencies, programs, and entities. A fourth section of this report discusses cross-cutting topics that encompass more than one agency. Entries in this report are for major agencies (e.g., the National Park Service) and cross-cutting issues (e.g., Everglades restoration) that receive funding in the Interior, Environment, and Related 1 2 These panels are now called the Subcommittees on Energy and Water Development. These panels are now called the Subcommittees on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. Congressional Research Service 1 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Agencies appropriations bill. For each agency or issue, we discuss some of the key funding changes enacted for FY2009, or proposed by the George W. Bush Administration, that have been of interest to Congress. We also address related policy issues that tend to occur in the context of considering appropriations legislation. Presenting such information in summary form is a challenge. For example, budget submissions for some agencies number several hundred pages and contain innumerable funding, programmatic, and legislative changes for congressional consideration. Further, appropriations laws provide funds for numerous accounts, activities, and subactivities, and the accompanying explanatory statements provide additional directives and other important information. For information on programs funded in the bill but not directly discussed in this report, please contact the key policy staff members listed at the end of the report. In general, in this report the term appropriations represents total funds available, including regular annual and supplemental appropriations, as well as rescissions, transfers, and deferrals, but excludes permanent mandatory budget authorities. This report contains final FY2009 appropriations levels for agencies, programs, and activities as enacted in the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L. 111-8, H.R. 1105). These funds generally are referred to as omnibus funds, or funds provided by the omnibus law. Increases and decreases generally are calculated on comparisons between these FY2009 omnibus funding levels and those requested by President Bush for FY2009 and enacted for FY2008. An overview of emergency funding for FY2009 provided in broad economic stimulus legislation (P.L. 111-5, H.R. 1) is discussed in the introduction to this report. This law contained additional FY2009 funding for some of the agencies and programs typically funded by the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill. These funds also are discussed in the pertinent sections throughout the report, in both the text and accompanying tables. They generally are referred to as stimulus funds, or funds provided by the stimulus law. The House Committee on Appropriations is the primary source of the funding figures used throughout the report. Other sources of information include the Senate Committee on Appropriations, agency budget justifications, and the Congressional Record. References to the “Explanatory Statement” for the omnibus law refer to the statement published in the February 23, 2009, Congressional Record. References to the “Explanatory Statement” for the stimulus law refer to the statement published in the February 12, 2009, Congressional Record, together with the tables published in the February 13, 2009, Congressional Record. In the tables throughout this report, some columns of funding figures do not add to the precise totals provided due to rounding. FY2004-FY2009 Table 1, below, shows appropriations for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies for FY2004-FY2009. Funding for earlier years is not readily available due to the changes in the makeup of the Interior appropriations bill. The FY2009 omnibus funding represented a $265.5 million increase (1%) over the FY2004 level in current dollars, or an 11% decrease in constant dollars (assuming the Congressional Budget Office’s inflation estimate of 2.2% for 2008 and projection of 1.5% for 2009). See Table 29 for a budgetary history of each agency for FY2004FY2009. Congressional Research Service 2 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Table 1. Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations, FY2004 to FY2009 (in billions of dollars) FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 Omnibus FY2009 Stimulus FY2009 Total Current Dollars $27.33 $27.02 $25.94 $27.40 $28.42 $27.59 $10.95 $38.54 Constant 2009 Dollarsa $31.03 $29.70 $27.64 $28.42 $28.84 $27.59 $10.95 $38.54 Note: These figures exclude permanent budget authorities, and generally do not reflect scorekeeping adjustments. They generally reflect rescissions and supplemental appropriations to date, except that the FY2006 figure does not reflect supplementals. The FY2007 figure includes $425.0 million for Secure Rural Schools. a. These figures are based on the Congressional Budget Office’s inflation projection of 1.5% for 2009. Current Overview On March 11, 2009, the President signed the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009 (P.L. 111-8, H.R. 1105). The omnibus law contained regular appropriations for FY2009 of $27.59 billion for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. This funding was $1.78 billion (7%) over the FY2009 Bush Administration request of $25.81 billion, but $825.9 million (3%) below the FY2008 level of $28.42 billion. This FY2008 level included $1.82 billion in emergency appropriations, most of which was for fighting wildfires on federal lands ($1.74 billion) with the remainder ($75.0 million) for FWS construction. While the FY2009 omnibus level included increases over FY2008 for many agencies, it contained decreases or level funding for others. The enactment of the regular appropriations for FY2009 followed the enactment of emergency funds for FY2009 in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5, H.R. 1). This broad economic stimulus legislation contained $10.95 billion in emergency funds for FY2009 for some of the accounts within agencies typically funded by the annual Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations laws. In general, the funds were made available for obligation until September 30, 2010 (the end of FY2010). These funds are discussed in the next section (below). Taken together, the omnibus law and the stimulus law provided a total of $38.54 billion for FY2009 for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies for FY2009. Regular appropriations for FY2009 were not enacted for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies before the October 1, 2008 start of the fiscal year. Accordingly, on September 30, 2008, President Bush signed the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009 (FY2009 CR, P.L. 110-329).3 Division A, Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2009, generally extended funding for accounts in the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill at the amounts provided in the FY2008 regular appropriations law. Funds were available under the terms and conditions provided in the FY2008 law, except where otherwise specified. The FY2009 CR provided appropriations from October 1, 3 Information on the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009, is contained in CRS Report RL34711, Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2009 (P.L. 110-329): An Overview, by (name redacted). Congressional Research Service 3 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations 2008 through March 6, 2009, and continuing appropriations were later extended through March 11, 2009 (P.L. 111-6).4 The FY2009 CR contained additional provisions related to Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. For instance, the law provided an additional $2.0 million to the National Park Service for security for the Presidential inauguration. It removed the prohibitions on spending funds for oil and gas leasing activities in certain regions of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), which had been controversial (see the “Minerals Management Service” section). The law also removed the prohibition on using funds to prepare final regulations regarding a commercial leasing program for oil shale or to conduct a commercial oil shale lease sale (see the “Bureau of Land Management” section). Further, the law contained provisions on funding for the Modified Water Deliveries Project, which pertains to water deliveries to Everglades National Park (see the “Everglades Restoration” section). President Bush had requested $25.81 billion for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies for FY2009, a $2.61 billion (9%) reduction from the FY2008 level of $28.42 billion (including emergency appropriations). While the President sought to increase funds for some agencies, he requested reduced funds for most agencies. The House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies had held hearings on FY2009 agency budget requests, and the House Subcommittee had marked up a draft appropriations bill. However, no bills providing regular appropriations for FY2009 for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies were reported by the House or Senate Appropriations Committees or considered on the House or Senate floor during the 110th Congress. Divisiveness over whether to retain long-standing prohibitions on funding for oil and gas leasing in regions of the Outer Continental Shelf was perhaps the biggest impediment to developing and considering an Interior appropriations bill. Economic Stimulus Legislation, P.L. 111-5 The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5, H.R. 1) was a $787 billion broad economic stimulus package that contains tax cuts and spending.5 Among the purposes of the economic stimulus law were preserving and creating jobs; promoting economic recovery; and making investments in transportation, environmental protection, and other infrastructure that will provide long-term economic benefits. The law included funds for certain agencies and activities typically funded by the annual Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations law. In total, the law contained $10.95 billion 4 Information on continuing resolutions is contained in CRS reports including the following: CRS Report RL30343, Continuing Resolutions: Latest Action and Brief Overview of Recent Practices, by (name redacted); CRS Report RL32614, Duration of Continuing Resolutions in Recent Years, by (name redacted); and CRS Report RL34700, Interim Continuing Resolutions (CRs): Potential Impacts on Agency Operations, by (name redacted). 5 For an overview of the law, see CRS Report R40537, American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5): Summary and Legislative History, by (name redacted), (name redacted), (name redacted), (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted). For a discussion of stimulus issues and policies, see CRS Report R40104, Economic Stimulus: Issues and Policies, by (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted). Congressional Research Service 4 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies.6 This amount was a 40% supplement to the $27.59 billion in omnibus appropriations for FY2009. Not every agency typically funded through the Interior bill received funding in the economic stimulus law. Moreover, the agencies that were funded received widely varying dollar amounts. In turn, these amounts constituted widely varying percentages of each agency’s FY2009 annual appropriations. Table 2, below, identifies the agencies and accounts that were funded by P.L. 1115. For general information on the agencies and the purposes of these accounts, as well as additional information on the stimulus funds, see the pertinent sections in the balance of this report. Of the $10.95 billion total in the economic stimulus law, $7.22 billion (66%) was provided to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The majority of EPA funding was for clean water ($4.00 billion) and drinking water ($2.00 billion) state revolving fund grants.7 The remainder of the funds was primarily for cleanup projects, specifically Superfund remediation, grants for cleanup of Brownfields and leaking underground storage tanks, and diesel emission reduction grants. Another portion of the funds was for the Office of Inspector General. EPA funding in the economic stimulus law approached the agency’s total FY2009 appropriations of $7.64 billion. Another $2.50 billion (23%) of the $10.95 billion total was provided to the four federal land management agencies: the Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, and Forest Service. These funds were provided for construction; wildfire management; and maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of facilities and trails, among other purposes.8 Of the $10.95 billion, a total of $1.00 billion (9%) was provided to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for activities including repair and restoration of roads, construction and improvement of schools, and maintenance and repair of detention centers ($500.0 million) and to the Indian Health Service for facilities construction, deferred maintenance, sanitation projects, and equipment purchases ($500.0 million), among other activities. The remaining $230.0 million (2%) of the $10.95 billion was provided to several other agencies for purposes including deferred maintenance of the U.S. Geological Survey, salaries and expenses of the DOI Inspector General, repair of Smithsonian facilities, and grants for the arts. In earlier action on the economic stimulus legislation (H.R. 1), the Senate had approved a slightly higher total—$11.11 billion—while the House had passed a still larger one—$14.81 billion. As shown in Table 2, there were a number of significant differences between the House- and Senatepassed versions of the bill. In general, the enacted appropriations for the various agencies and accounts were closer to the Senate’s version of the measure. Among the general provisions of the law,9 agencies were to begin spending the funds “as quickly as possible consistent with prudent management.”10 With regard to funds for infrastructure, 6 These funds were contained in Division A, Title VII. For information on these grants and other water infrastructure funding in the economic stimulus law, see CRS Report R40216, Water Infrastructure Funding in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, by (name redacted) and (name redacted). 8 For more information on funds for these agencies in the economic stimulus law, see CRS Report R40217, Federal Lands Provisions of Economic Stimulus Legislation (P.L. 111-5), by (name redacted). 9 The law contains other provisions on the allocation of appropriations that are beyond the scope of this discussion. 10 Sec. 3, “Purposes and Principles.” 7 Congressional Research Service 5 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations recipients were to give preference to activities “that can be started and completed expeditiously,” with a goal of using at least 50% of the monies for activities that can be started within 120 days of enactment.11 P.L. 111-5 provided emergency funding for FY2009, with the monies available for obligation until September 30, 2010 (the end of FY2010), unless otherwise specified.12 In general, the accounts funded in the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations title of P.L. 111-5 did not contain different periods of obligation, although there were exceptions (e.g., funding for the DOI and EPA Inspectors General). By comparison, the regular, annual Interior appropriations laws generally do not limit obligations to two years. For instance, in the FY2009 omnibus appropriations law, some of the accounts that were funded by P.L. 111-5 received appropriations that would be available until expended, while others received appropriations only for one or two fiscal years. The economic stimulus law also stated that it shall have no effect on the availability of funds under the FY2009 continuing appropriations resolution, and that appropriations were in addition to amounts otherwise appropriated for the fiscal year involved.13 It required that each agency receiving funding in the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies title was to notify the House and Senate Appropriations Committees as to how the monies were to be spent. Specifically, it provided that each such agency was to submit to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, within 30 days of enactment, a general plan for the expenditure of the funds. Each agency also was to submit to the committees, within 90 days of enactment, a report “containing detailed project level information associated with the general plan.”14 The law authorized each agency receiving funding in the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies title to transfer up to 10% of the funds in any account to other accounts within the agency, if certain conditions were met. The conditions were that the agency head “determines that the transfer will enhance the efficiency or effectiveness of the use of the funds without changing the intended purpose,” and notifies the House and Senate Appropriations Committees “10 days prior to the transfer.”15 In addition, in the explanatory statement on the bill, the Appropriations Committees expressed that funds for administrative and support costs of activities funded in the Interior title are not to exceed 5% of any specific appropriation, unless otherwise specified.16 11 Sec. 1602, Division A. Sec. 1603, Division A. 13 Sec. 1601, Division A. 14 Sec. 701, Division A. The Administration has established a website for information related to implementation and oversight of stimulus funds. Through that website, http://www.recovery.gov/, separate websites established by federal agencies and states may be accessed. 15 Sec. 703, Division A. 16 H.Rept. 111-16, Conference Report to Accompany H.R. 1, Joint Explanatory Statement of the Committee of Conference, p. 447. 12 Congressional Research Service 6 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Table 2. Appropriations for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies in P.L. 111-5 ($ in millions) Agency and Account House Passed Senate Passed Enacted Department of the Interior BLM —Management of Lands and Resources 0 135.0 125.0 325.0 180.0 180.0 0 15.0 15.0 325.0 330.0 320.0 0 165.0 165.0 —Construction 300.0 110.0 115.0 Subtotal, FWS 300.0 275.0 280.0 —Operation of the National Park System 0 158.0 146.0 —Historic Preservation Funda 0 0 15.0 —Construction 1,700.0 589.0 589.0 ——Historical and Cultural Resources 200.0 0 0 ——Historic Preservation Funda 15.0 0 0 —Centennial Challenge 100.0 0 0 1,800.0 747.0 750.0 USGS, Surveys, Investigations, and Research 200.0 135.0 140.0 Subtotal, USGS 200.0 135.0 140.0 —Operation of Indian Programs 0 40.0 40.0 ——Housing Improvement Program 0 20.0 0 —Construction 500.0 522.0 450.0 ——Schools and Detention Centers 250.0 0 0 0 10.0 10.0 500.0 572.0 500.0 —Departmental Offices, Insular Affairs, Assistance to Territories 0 62.0 0 —Departmental Offices, Office of Inspector General, Salaries and Expenses 15.0b 15.0 15.0 —Department-Wide Programs, Central Hazardous Materials Fund 0 20.0 0 Subtotal, Other DOI 15.0b 97.0 15.0 3,140.0 2,156.0 2,005.0 —Construction —Wildland Fire Management Subtotal, BLM FWS —Resource Management NPS Subtotal, NPS BIA —Indian Guaranteed Loan Program Account Subtotal, BIA Other DOI Subtotal, DOI EPA Congressional Research Service 7 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Agency and Account House Passed Senate Passed Enacted —Office of Inspector General 20.0 0 20.0 —Hazardous Substance Superfund 800.0 600.0 600.0 —Leaking Underground Storage Tank Trust Fund Program 200.0 200.0 200.0 —State and Tribal Assistance Grants 8,400.0 6,400.0 6,400.0 ——Clean Water State Revolving Fund Grants 6,000.0 4,000.0 4,000.0 ——Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Grants 2,000.0 2,000.0 2,000.0 ——Brownfields Projects (grants for site assessment and cleanup under §104(k) of CERCLA)c 100.0 100.0 100.0 —Diesel Emission Reduction Act grants (Title VII, Subtitle G, Energy Policy Act of 2005) 300.0 300.0 300.0 9,420.0 7,200.0 7,220.0 —Capital Improvement and Maintenance 650.0 650.0 650.0 —Wildland Fire Management 850.0 485.0 500.0 ——Federal Lands 300.0 0 250.0 ——State/Private Forestry 550.0 260.0 250.0 0 50.0 50.0 1,500.0 1,135.0 1,150.0 —Indian Health Services 0 135.0 85.0 ——Contract Health Services 0 50.0 0 ——Health Information Technology 0 85.0 0 550.0 410.0 415.0 0 0 227.0 Subtotal, IHS 550.0 545.0 500.0 Smithsonian Institution, Facilities Capital 150.0 75.0 25.0 Subtotal, Smithsonian Institution 150.0 75.0 25.0 NEA, Grants and Administration 50.0 0 50.0 Subtotal NEA 50.0 0 50.0 Subtotal, EPA FS ——Grants for Using Biomassd Subtotal, FS IHS —Indian Health Facilities ——Completion of Two Facilities Total Appropriations 14,810.0 11,111.0 10,950.0 Source: The primary source of this information is the Congressional Record, February 13, 2009 p. H1546-H1548. Note: The following agency acronyms are used in this table: BLM, Bureau of Land Management; FWS, Fish and Wildlife Service; NPS, National Park Service; USGS, United States Geological Survey; BIA, Bureau of Indian Affairs; DOI, Department of the Interior; EPA, Environmental Protection Agency; FS, Forest Service; IHS, Indian Health Service; NEA, National Endowment for the Arts. a. The House-passed bill provided that $15.0 million of the funds provided for construction were to be transferred to the Historic Preservation Fund. This appropriation is reflected in the table under the NPS construction account for the House-passed bill. b. The House-passed bill included these funds in Title I (General Provisions) of the bill, rather than in the title for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. Congressional Research Service 8 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations c. CERCLA is the acronym for the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980. d. In the Senate-passed bill, it appears that these funds were to be derived from the state/private forestry amount. In the enacted bill, these funds were to be derived from the total for wildland fire management; therefore, the $50.0 million is a subamount within the other line items. Major Issues Controversial funding and policy issues typically have been debated during consideration of the annual Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill. Issues that have tended to be controversial, that are discussed in subsequent sections of this report, include those listed below. • Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds, especially the adequacy of funding to meet state and local wastewater and drinking water needs. These state revolving funds provide seed money for state loans to communities for wastewater and drinking water infrastructure projects. (For more information, see the “Environmental Protection Agency” section in this report.) • Construction of BIA Schools and IHS Health Facilities, particularly whether to enact funding cuts proposed in President Bush’s budget. (For more information, see the “Bureau of Indian Affairs” and the “Indian Health Service” sections in this report.) • Indian Trust Funds, especially whether to enact reductions proposed in President Bush’s FY2009 request and the method by which a historical accounting will be conducted of Individual Indian Money (IIM) accounts to determine correct balances in the class-action lawsuit against the government. (For more information, see the “Office of Special Trustee for American Indians” section in this report.) • Land Acquisition, including the appropriate level of funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund for federal land acquisition and the state grant program, and extent to which the fund should be used for activities not involving land acquisition. (For more information, see “The Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)” section in this report.) • Outer Continental Shelf Leasing, particularly preleasing and leasing activities in offshore areas. (For more information, see the “Minerals Management Service” section in this report.) • Payments in Lieu of Taxes Program (PILT), primarily the appropriate level of funding for compensating local governments for federal land within their jurisdictions. (For more information, see the “Payments in Lieu of Taxes Program (PILT)” section in this report.) • Royalty Relief, especially the extent to which oil and natural gas companies receive royalty relief for production of oil and natural gas on federal lands. (For more information see the “Minerals Management Service” section of this report.) • Superfund, notably the adequacy of proposed funding to meet hazardous waste cleanup needs, and whether to continue using general Treasury revenues to fund the account or reinstate a tax on industry that originally paid for most of the Congressional Research Service 9 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations program. (For more information, see the “Environmental Protection Agency” section in this report.) • Termination of BIA Education and Housing and IHS Urban Health Programs, particularly whether to end funding for BIA’s Johnson-O’Malley grants to schools and the Housing Improvement Program and for IHS’s urban Indian health projects. (For more information, see the “Bureau of Indian Affairs” and the “Indian Health Service” sections in this report.) • Wildland Fire Fighting, involving questions about the appropriate level of funding to fight fires on agency lands; advisability of borrowing funds from other agency programs to fight wildfires; implementation of a program for wildland fire protection and locations for fire protection treatments; and impact of environmental analysis, public involvement, and challenges to agency decisions on fuel reduction activities. (For more information, see the “Wildland Fire Management” section in this report.) Status of Bill Table 3, below, contains information on the development of the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, which included funding for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. Table 3. Status of Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations, FY2009 (H.R. 1105) Subcommittee Markup House Senate 06/11/08a ─ H. Comm. House S. Comm. Senate Report Passage Report Passage ─ 02/25/09 245-178 Conf. Report Conference Report Approval Public Law House Senate ─ ─ 02/23/09 03/10/09 ─ voice vote explanatory statementb 03/11/09 P.L. 111-8 a. This subcommittee markup occurred on a draft of a different (unnumbered) bill. b. This column identifies the explanatory statement on H.R. 1105 published in the Congressional Record on February 23, 2009. Section 4 of P.L. 111-8 states that this statement “shall have the same effect with respect to the allocation of funds and implementation of this Act as if it were a joint explanatory statement of a committee of conference. “ Congressional Research Service 10 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Title I: Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management17 Overview The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages approximately 258 million acres of public land for diverse and sometimes conflicting uses, such as energy and minerals development, livestock grazing, recreation, and preservation. The agency also is responsible for about 700 million acres of federal subsurface mineral estate throughout the nation, and supervises mineral operations on an estimated 56 million acres of Indian Trust lands. Another key BLM function is wildland fire management on about 370 million acres of DOI, other federal, and certain nonfederal land. The FY2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act provided $1.04 billion for the BLM, a $30.7 million (3%) increase over FY2008 and a $39.5 million (4%) increase over the FY2009 Bush Administration request.18 See Table 4. These figures do not include funds for DOI wildland fire management. In the past, wildland fire funds have been appropriated to BLM for fire fighting on all DOI lands. However, for FY2009, the Bush Administration proposed funding for DOI fire fighting as a department-wide program, rather than through the BLM. The Bush Administration had sought $850.1 million for DOI wildland fire management. The FY2009 omnibus law contained $859.5 million, a $9.3 million (1%) increase over the FY2009 Bush Administration request but a $332.6 million (28%) decrease from the $1.19 billion appropriated to the BLM for FY2008. The FY2009 stimulus appropriations law contained an additional $15.0 million for BLM for Wildand Fire Management. (For more information, see the “Wildland Fire Management” section in this report.) Proposed funding for several key activities is discussed below. The Bush Administration’s FY2009 budget included several suggested changes in law. For instance, the Bush Administration suggested amending the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act in part to alter the distribution of proceeds from land sales. Legislation would be needed to make these changes, but such legislation has not been enacted. Under current law, proceeds are deposited into a separate Treasury account and are available primarily for land acquisition. President Bush’s proposal would have directed 70% of the proceeds to the general fund of the Treasury. It would have capped receipts retained by DOI at $60 million annually, and directed using updated land management plans to determine which lands to sell or exchange. The Bush Administration supported these changes to increase the funds subject to oversight during the appropriations process and to enhance the public benefits from land sales, according to the BLM budget justification. The Bush Administration made similar proposals in earlier budget requests, which were not enacted. 17 For more information on BLM funding, contact (name redacted) at 7-..... In this report, the Administration’s request for BLM is reported as $999.1 million, rather than the $987.4 million indicated in the tables accompanying the explanatory statement on the FY2009 omnibus bill. Those tables reflect an Administration reduction for the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund as part of the BLM request, whereas this report reflects that reduction in the request for the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement. 18 Congressional Research Service 11 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations The FY2009 omnibus law included $10.0 million for the Range Improvement Fund. The Bush Administration had proposed to eliminate the fund, and consequently did not request an appropriation. Table 4, below, nevertheless shows a request of $10.0 million because under current law a portion of the grazing fees collected are deposited in the fund. The Administration had sought a legislative change to direct that the grazing fee receipts that are deposited into the fund instead be deposited in the general fund of the Treasury. Range improvements include vegetation projects, fencing, and water developments. The Bush Administration had advocated the change so that construction and maintenance of public land projects would be the responsibility of public land users and interest groups, while allowing that BLM funds from other accounts could be used for range improvements. The Bush Administration had proposed similar changes in earlier budget requests. Management of Lands and Resources Management of Lands and Resources includes funds for an array of BLM land programs, including protection, recreational use, improvement, development, disposal, and general BLM administration. For this line item, the FY2009 omnibus law contained $890.2 million, $36.3 million (4%) over the FY2008 level and $25.4 million (3%) over the FY2009 Bush Administration request. The FY2009 stimulus law contained an additional $125.0 million for Management of Lands of Resources, for activities including remediation of abandoned mines and wells and also maintenance, rehabilitation, and restoration of facilities, property, trails, and lands. Table 4. Appropriations for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), FY2008-FY2009 ($ in millions) FY2008 Approp. FY2009 Request FY2009 Omnibus FY2009 Stimulus FY2009 Total 853.9 864.8 890.2 125.0 1,015.2 Construction 6.4 4.5 6.6 180.0 186.6 Land Acquisition 8.9 4.5 14.8 0 14.8 Oregon and California Grant Lands 108.5 108.3 109.9 0 109.9 Range Improvements BLM Management of Lands and Resources 10.0 10.0 10.0 0 10.0 Service Charges, Deposits, and Forfeituresa 0 0 0 0 0 Miscellaneous Trust Funds and Permanent Operating Funds 20.1 7.1 7.1 0 7.1 —Current Appropriations 20.1 20.1 20.1 0 20.1 0 -13.0 -13.0 0 -13.0 1,007.9 999.1 1,038.6 305.0 1,343.6 —Naval Oil Shale Reserves, Mineral Leasing Receipts Total Appropriationsb a. The figures of “0” are a result of an appropriation matched by offsetting fees. b. The figures do not reflect funds for DOI wildland fire management. For FY2008, $1.19 billion was appropriated to the BLM for DOI wildland fire management. For FY2009, the Bush Administration sought to fund wildland fire management as a department-wide program, with a request for $850.1 million. The FY2009 omnibus law contained $859.5 million for DOI Wildland Fire Management, and the FY2009 stimulus law included $15.0 for the BLM for Wildland Fire Management. Congressional Research Service 12 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations The omnibus law specified $28.2 million from this account for the national monuments and conservation areas of the National Landscape Conservation System (NLCS), an increase of $6.4 million over the Administration’s request of $21.8 million. This system consists of approximately 27 million acres of BLM’s protected areas. Overall, the FY2009 omnibus law contained $60.8 million for the NLCS, from multiple accounts, an increase over both the FY2008 appropriation of $54.2 million and the FY2009 Administration request of $49.9 million. The FY2009 omnibus law provided less funding than FY2008 for some activities that are funded by this account. For instance, it contained $45.9 million for recreation resources management, a decrease from the FY2008 level of $50.5 million. However, in general the FY2009 omnibus law contained increased funds for activities over the FY2008 level. Among the increases were those for the following: • Soil, water, and air management: $6.3 million, from $34.3 million to $40.6 million. Included within the appropriation was an increase of $7.5 million for abandoned mine remediation and inventory in the West; • Wild horse and burro management: $4.4 million, from $36.2 million to $40.6 million; • Wildlife management: $4.4 million, from $30.7 million to $35.1 million. Included within the appropriation was an additional $4.6 million for the native plant materials development program, which was moved from the DOI Wildland Fire Management account; and • Resource protection and law enforcement: $4.9 million, from $22.6 million to $27.5 million. Included in the appropriation was an increase of $5.1 million for drug enforcement on BLM lands. The FY2009 omnibus law included $99.4 million for energy and minerals management, a $10.5 million reduction from the FY2008 level of $109.9 million and a $32.6 million decrease from the FY2009 Bush Administration request of $132.0 million. The lower appropriation for FY2009 was primarily the result of $36.4 million in offsetting fees, as compared with $25.5 million for FY2008 and none in the Administration’s request. These revenues are derived through a program requiring payment of $4,000 for each application for a permit to drill oil and gas wells. Including these revenues, the amount available for FY2008 was $135.4 million and the amount available for FY2009 would be $135.8 million. The Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2009, removed the prohibition on using funds to prepare final regulations regarding a commercial leasing program for oil shale or to conduct a commercial oil shale lease sale. The funding prohibition had been included in the FY2008 appropriations law. According to the Department of the Interior and the oil industry, final regulations were important for giving the industry greater certainty, regarding access to federal lands. Final regulations were subsequently issued. For the healthy lands initiative for FY2009, the omnibus law contained $7.8 million. These funds would be derived from the appropriations for different activities, and would constitute an increase of $2.9 million over the $4.9 million appropriated for FY2008. The Bush Administration had sought a higher funding level—$14.9 million. The Administration anticipated using another $8.2 million in existing funds for the initiative for both FY2009 and FY2008, while raising $10.0 million in contributions from partners in FY2009 and $3.4 million in FY2008. The initiative consists of vegetation resources enhancements to restore and improve the health and productivity of western public lands across large areas of land. It currently focuses on six areas located in Congressional Research Service 13 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Utah, New Mexico, southwest Wyoming, southeast Oregon-southwest Idaho-northern Nevada, south-central Idaho, and western Colorado. In its FY2009 budget justification, BLM stated that these areas were selected due to an “urgent” need to maintain, improve, and restore wildlife habitat to help preclude the need to list species under the Endangered Species Act. With the additional funds sought in FY2009, the Administration was seeking to expand the Colorado initiative and to add a seventh area—California. The FY2009 omnibus law did not specify how the funding would be used. Construction For FY2009, the omnibus law contained $6.6 million for BLM construction, an increase of $0.2 million over FY2008 and $2.1 million over the Bush Administration’s request for FY2009. The law included funding for two construction projects requested by the Administration as well as two additional ones. The FY2009 stimulus law provided an additional $180.0 million to BLM for construction, including for energy efficient retrofits of existing facilities and for construction, reconstruction, decommissioning, and repair of roads, bridges, trails, property, and facilities. This funding is significantly larger than has been provided for BLM construction in at least a decade. Funds from FY1999 to the present have ranged from a low of $6.4 million in FY2008 to a high of $16.8 million in FY2001. Land Acquisition For Land Acquisition for FY2009, the omnibus law included $14.8 million for eight specified acquisitions. This was an increase of $5.8 million over FY2008 and $10.3 million over the Bush Administration’s FY2009 request. The appropriation for BLM acquisitions had fallen steadily from $49.9 million in FY2002 to $8.9 million for FY2008. Money for land acquisition is appropriated from the Land and Water Conservation Fund. (For more information, see the “Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)” section in this report.) CRS Report R40237, Federal Lands Managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest Service (FS): Issues for the 111th Congress, (name redacted), (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted). For further information on the Bureau of Land Management, see its website at http://www.blm.gov/nhp/index.htm. Fish and Wildlife Service19 The omnibus appropriations law provided $1.44 billion for Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) accounts. This was $850,000 less than the FY2008 appropriation, which had included $75.0 million in emergency appropriations for construction. However, it was a $138.7 million increase (11%) over President Bush’s request of $1.30 billion for FY2009. By far the largest portion of the FWS annual appropriation is for the Resource Management account, for which the omnibus law appropriated $1.14 billion. This was an increase of $58.3 million (5%) over FY2008 and of $72.1 million (7%) over the FY2009 Bush Administration’s 19 For more information on FWS funding, contact (name redacted) at 7-..... Congressional Research Service 14 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations request. Among the programs included in Resource Management are the Endangered Species program, the Refuge System, and Law Enforcement. The stimulus law provided an additional $280.0 million for FWS, to be spent in two accounts: Resource Management ($165.0 million) and Construction ($115.0 million). Table 5. Appropriations for the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), FY2008-FY2009 ($ in thousands) FY2008 Approp. FY2009 Request FY2009 FY2009 Omnibus Stimulus FY2009 Total Resource Management 1,082,616 1,068,886 1,140,962 165,000 1,305,962 —Ecological Services: Endangered Species 150,508 146,841 157,973 n/a n/a —Ecological Services: Habitat Conservation and Environmental Contaminants 112,888 108,739 118,297 n/a n/a —National Wildlife Refuge System 434,124 434,124 462,859 n/a n/a —Migratory Birds, Law Enforcement & International Conservation 118,919 120,906 126,717 n/a n/a —Fisheries 126,499 116,635 131,831 n/a n/a —General Administration 139,678 141,641 143,285 n/a n/a Construction 108,162 12,180 35,533 115,000 150,533 Land Acquisition 34,596 10,171 42,455 0 42,455 Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund 73,831 75,501 75,501 0 75,501 National Wildlife Refuge Fund 13,980 10,811 14,100 0 14,100 North American Wetlands Conservation Fund 41,981 42,647 42,647 0 42,647 Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Fund 4,430 3,960 4,750 0 4,750 Multinational Species Conservation Fund 7,875 4,256 10,000 0 10,000 State and Tribal Wildlife Grants 73,830 73,830 75,000 0 75,000 0 -497 -497 0 -497 FWS Appropriations Wildlife Conservation and Appreciation Fund (cancel prior-year funds) Total Appropriations 1,441,301 1,301,745 1,440,451 280,000 1,720,451 Endangered Species Funding Funding for the Endangered Species program is part of the Resource Management account, and is one of the perennially controversial portions of the FWS budget. The FY2009 omnibus appropriation was $158.0 million, an increase over both the FY2009 request of $146.8 million and the FY2008 level of $150.5 million. See Table 6. Certain related programs also have benefitted conservation of species that are listed, or proposed for listing, under the Endangered Species Act. The omnibus law increased the Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund (for grants to states and territories to conserve threatened Congressional Research Service 15 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations and endangered species) from $73.8 million in FY2008 to $75.5 million in FY2009.20 This was the amount proposed by President Bush. The request included a proposal to cancel $4.5 million in prior year balances, which Congress also accepted. See Table 6. In total, the FY2009 appropriation contained $233.5 million for endangered species and related programs, up 4% from the FY2008 level of $224.3 million and 5% from the FY2009 Bush Administration request of $222.3 million. Table 6. Appropriations for the Endangered Species Program and Related Programs, FY2008-FY2009 ($ in thousands) FY2009 FY2009 Omnibus Stimulusa FY2009 Total FY2008 Approp. FY2009 Request —Candidate Conservation 9,731 8,659 10,670 n/a n/a —Listing 17,978 18,188 19,266 n/a n/a —Consultation 51,758 51,577 53,462 n/a n/a —Recovery 71,041 68,417 74,575 n/a n/a 150,508 146,841 157,973 n/a n/a 73,831 75,501b 75,501b 0 75,501 224,339 222,342 233,474 n/a n/a Endangered Species and Related Programs Endangered Species Program Subtotal, Endangered Species Program Related Program: Cooperative Endangered Species Conservation Fund Total Appropriations a. It is unclear what, if any, of the stimulus funding of $165.0 million appropriated to Resource Management would be allocated to these programs. Because job creation is a major criterion for use of stimulus funds, the Listing and Consultation Programs appear to be less likely to be eligible than Candidate Conservation and Recovery, given the nature of their responsibilities. b. Reflects a cancellation of $4.5 million in prior year balances. Changing ESA Rules: Consultation and Polar Bears In August 2008, FWS and the National Marine Fisheries Service proposed changes to the regulations that address the consultation process under ESA.21 Final regulations were published December 16, 2008, and took effect on January 15, 2009. The changes were considered controversial. A provision of the omnibus law authorized the Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce to withdraw or reissue the regulations within 60 days of enactment "without regard to any provision of statute or regulation."22 This meant that no rulemaking steps would be required, such as notice and comment periods. The law allowed the previous regulations to return to 20 Two other related programs were terminated in FY2008, when President Bush proposed, and Congress approved, ending the Landowner Incentive Program ($23.7 million in FY2007) as well as Stewardship Grants ($7.3 million in FY2007), which also benefit listed species. No funding was sought or provided for either program for FY2009. 21 See CRS Report RL34641, Changes to the Consultation Regulations of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), by (name redacted) and (name redacted). 22 P.L. 111-8, Div. E, Tit. I, § 429(a)(1). Congressional Research Service 16 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations effect.23 On April 28, 2009, FWS announced that the new rules were rescinded and the old rules would be in effect. This provision of the omnibus appropriations law also authorized the Secretary of the Interior to withdraw special rules that were issued for the threatened polar bear. The final rules were published on December 10, 2008, and limited ESA protections to those protections already available under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. They further limited requirements for consultation about federal activities that may affect the species.24 National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS) and Law Enforcement The omnibus appropriations law provided $462.9 million for refuge operations and maintenance. The FY2008 appropriation was $434.1 million, the same level as was proposed by President Bush for FY2009. The law increased wildlife and habitat management, refuge-based law enforcement, visitor services, maintenance, and conservation planning. The Bush Administration had proposed that a portion of the wildlife and habitat management spending be funded by the Land and Water Conservation Fund, but Congress did not accept the proposal. Costs of operations have increased on many refuges, partly due to special problems such as hurricane damage and more aggressive border enforcement, but also due to increased use, invasive species control, and other demands. Refuge funding was not keeping pace with new demands, and these demands, combined with the rising costs of rent, salaries, fuel, and utilities, led to cuts in funding for programs to aid endangered species, reduce infestation by invasive species, protect water supplies, address habitat restoration, and ensure staffing at the less popular refuges. While increases were provided to address these problems in recent years, the stimulus law provided additional funding to address these concerns. However, some observers contend that the system’s problems are on-going and will be significant after the stimulus funding is exhausted. The omnibus appropriations law contained $62.7 million for FY2009 for FWS law enforcement nationwide, an increase of 5% over the FY2008 level of $59.6 million. The FY2009 Bush Administration request was $57.4 million. Nationwide, law enforcement includes border inspections and investigations of violations of endangered species or waterfowl hunting laws. Refuges: Stimulus Funding The FY2009 stimulus law provided the FWS with $165.0 million for Resource Management and $115.0 for Construction, using nearly identical criteria for project selection. For both accounts, the explanatory statement25 encouraged that “selection of individual projects be based on a 23 The law provided that if the rule was withdrawn, the Secretary "shall implement the provisions of law under which the rule was issued in accordance with the regulations in effect under such provisions immediately before the effective date of such rule, except as otherwise provided by any Act or rule that takes effect after the effective date of the rule that is withdrawn." P.L. 111-8, Div. E, Tit. I, § 429(b). 24 For more analysis on the polar bear special rules, see CRS Report RL34573, Does the Endangered Species Act (ESA) Listing Provide More Protection of the Polar Bear?: A Look at the Special Rules, by (name redacted), and CRS Report RL33941, Polar Bears: Listing Under the Endangered Species Act, by (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted). 25 H.Rept. 111-16, p. 439-440. Congressional Research Service 17 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations prioritization process which weighs the capacity of proposals to create the largest number of jobs in the shortest period of time and which creates lasting value for the American public. While maximizing jobs, the Service should consider priority critical deferred maintenance and capital improvement projects, trail maintenance, and habitat restoration on National Wildlife Refuges, National Fish Hatcheries, and other Service properties.” [for the Resource Management account] priority construction, reconstruction and repair, critical deferred maintenance and capital improvement projects, road maintenance, energy conservation projects and habitat restoration on National Wildlife Refuges, National Fish Hatcheries and other Service properties.” [for the Construction account] FWS has elaborated that “[t]o complete this work, we plan to hire local laborers, building contractors, companies and other entities to do the maintenance, repairs, retrofits, and construction.”26 Refuges are likely to be among the biggest beneficiaries of the stimulus funding, and the refuge maintenance backlog could be affected substantially. Improvements in energy conservation at refuge visitor centers also appear likely. Habitat improvement might include removal of invasive species, and recovery of protected species. To the extent that refuges are scattered throughout the country, job creation should likewise be distributed. Construction The omnibus appropriations law contained $35.5 million for construction, an increase from the President’s request of $12.2 million, but down 67% from the FY2008 total of $108.2 million. The FY2008 total included regular appropriations of $33.2 million and $75.0 million in emergency appropriations. The Construction account received an additional $115.0 million from the stimulus law. This figure, along with the FY2009 annual appropriation, resulted in a total of $150.5 million for Construction, up 39% over the total FY2008 appropriation. Avian Flu The omnibus law appropriated $4.9 million for avian flu research and monitoring, the level requested by President Bush, and down 33% from the FY2008 level of $7.3 million. In addition, Congress transferred the program from General Administration to the Migratory Bird Management Program, as requested by President Bush. Under the program, FWS cooperates with other federal and nonfederal agencies in studying the spread of the virus through wild birds. Attention is on North American species whose migratory patterns make them likely to come into contact with infected Asian birds. The geographic focus is on Alaska, the Pacific Flyway (along the west coast), and Pacific islands, with smaller samples in other areas. (See CRS Report RL33795, Avian Influenza in Poultry and Wild Birds, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).) Land Acquisition The omnibus appropriations law increased land acquisition funding for FY2009 to $42.5 million, up from the FY2008 level of $34.6 million. For FY2009, President Bush’s budget had sought to 26 Personal communication to (name redacted) from Division of Congressional and Legislative Affairs, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, March 24, 2009. Congressional Research Service 18 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations reduce Land Acquisition to $10.2 million, down 71%. The Administration had proposed that $0.9 million be allocated to Refuge Acquisition, down $19.8 million (96%) from FY2008. The Administration asserted that the proposed reduction would allow the agency to better focus on management of lands currently in the refuge system, by not adding to operations and maintenance costs through additional acquisitions.27 See Table 7. In the past, the bulk of this FWS program has been for acquisitions of land for specified federal refuges, but a portion was used for closely related functions such as acquisition management, land exchanges, emergency acquisitions, purchase of inholdings, and general overhead. In recent years, less of the funding has been reserved for traditional land acquisition. This program is funded with appropriations from LWCF. (For more information, see the “Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)” in this report.) Under the Migratory Bird Conservation Account (MBCA), FWS has a source of mandatory spending for land acquisition. The account is permanently appropriated, with funds derived from the sale of duck stamps to hunters and import duties on certain arms and ammunition. For FY2009, President Bush proposed to increase the price of a duck stamp from the current $15 to $25, with a further increase to $35 beginning in FY2013. No action has been taken on the proposal. As annual appropriations for acquisitions under LWCF have declined, the MBCA ($43.7 million in FY2007, and an estimated $40.0 million for FY2008 and FY2009) has become increasingly used to protect habitat for migratory birds, especially waterfowl. Other species in these habitats benefit incidentally. President Bush’s budget assumed that Congress would enact an increase in the price of duck stamps, and that as a result MBCA revenues for FY2009 would increase 35% to $54.0 million. Table 7. Appropriations for the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS): Land Acquisition Program, FY2008-FY2009 ($ in thousands) FY2008 Approp. FY2009 Request FY2009 Omnibus Acquisitions—Federal Refuge Lands 20,676 900 28,315 Inholdings 2,953 1,500 3,000 0 1,500 0 Exchanges 1,477 1,537 1,500 Acquisition Management 8,013 3,240 8,140 Cost Allocation Methodology 1,477 1,494 1,500 34,596 10,171 42,455 FWS Land Acquisition Emergencies & Hardships Total Appropriations Wildlife Refuge Fund The National Wildlife Refuge Fund (also called the Refuge Revenue Sharing Fund) compensates counties for the presence of the non-taxable federal lands of the National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS). A portion of the fund is supported by the permanent appropriation of receipts from various activities carried out on the NWRS. However, these receipts are not sufficient for full funding of amounts authorized in the formula, and county governments have long urged 27 U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Fiscal Year FY2009: The Interior Budget in Brief, February 2008, p. DO-21. Congressional Research Service 19 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations additional appropriations to make up the difference. As it often has in the past, Congress has provided additional appropriations ─ $14.1 million for FY2009. This was a slight increase over the FY2008 level of $14.0 million, and a 30% increase over the President’s request of $10.8 million. With refuge receipts, the FY2009 omnibus appropriation level would fund about 47% of the authorized payment level, down from 51% in FY2008.28 Multinational Species and Neotropical Migrants The Multinational Species Conservation Fund (MSCF) has generated considerable constituent interest despite the small size of the program. It benefits Asian and African elephants, tigers, rhinoceroses, great apes, and marine turtles. The omnibus appropriations law contained $10.0 million for MSCF, an increase over President Bush’s request of $4.3 million and the FY2008 level of $7.9 million. The law also appropriated $4.8 million for the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Fund (NMBCF). This was higher than President Bush’s FY2009 request of $4.0 million and the FY2008 level of $4.4 million. See Table 8. Table 8. Appropriations for the Multinational Species Conservation Fund (MSCF) and Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Fund, FY2008-FY2009 ($ in thousands) FY2008 Approp. FY2009 Request FY2009 Omnibus African Elephant 1,477 990 2,000 Tiger and Rhinos 1,969 990 2,500 Asian Elephant 1,477 990 2,000 Great Apes 1,969 990 2,000 Marine Turtles 983 296 1,500 Total MSCF Appropriations 7,875 4,256 10,000 Neotropical Migratory Birds 4,430 3,960 4,750 Multinational Species Conservation Fund State and Tribal Wildlife Grants State and Tribal Wildlife Grants help fund efforts to conserve species (including nongame species) of concern to states, territories, and tribes. The grants have generated considerable support from these governments. The program was created in the FY2001 Interior appropriations law (P.L. 106-291) and further detailed in subsequent Interior appropriations laws. (It does not have any separate authorizing statute.) Funds may be used to develop state conservation plans as well as to support specific practical conservation projects. A portion of the funding is set aside for competitive grants to tribal governments or tribal wildlife agencies. The remaining portion is for matching grants to states. A state’s allocation is determined by formula. The omnibus appropriations law contained $75.0 million for FY2009. The appropriation for FY2008 was $73.8 million, and the FY2009 request was identical. See Table 9. 28 The National Wildlife Refuge Fund is distinct from the Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) program run by DOI, and for which many types of federal lands are eligible. In 2009, Congress made PILT a mandatory spending program for FY2008-FY2012, but did not change the Refuge Fund. See “Payments in Lieu of Taxes,” below. Congressional Research Service 20 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Table 9. Appropriations for State and Tribal Wildlife Grants, FY2008-FY2009 ($ in thousands) FY2008 Approp. FY2009 Request FY2009 Omnibus State Grants 62,724 62,724 63,000 Competitive Grants for States, Territories, & Other Jurisdictions 4,922 4,922 5,000 Tribal Grants 6,184 6,184 7,000 73,830 73,830 75,000 State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Total Appropriations CRS Report RL33872, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR): New Directions in the 110th Congress, by (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted). CRS Report RL33795, Avian Influenza in Poultry and Wild Birds, by (name redacted) and (name red acted). CRS Report R40185, The Endangered Species Act (ESA) in the 111th Congress: Conflicting Values and Difficult Choices, by (name redacted), (name redacted), (name redacted), (name r edacted), and (name redacted). CRS Report RS21157, Multinational Species Conservation Fund, by (name redacted) and (na me redacted). For further information on the Fish and Wildlife Service, see its website at http://www.fws.gov/. National Park Service29 The National Park Service (NPS) is responsible for the National Park System, currently comprising 391 separate and diverse park units covering 85 million acres. The NPS protects, preserves, interprets, and administers the park system’s diverse natural and historic areas representing the cultural identity of the American people. The system has roughly 20 types of area designations, including national parks, monuments, memorials, historic sites, battlefields, seashores, recreational areas, and other classifications. The NPS mission is to protect park resources and values, unimpaired, while making them accessible to the public. Park recreational visits totaled nearly 275 million visits in 2008. The NPS also supports and promotes some resource conservation activities outside the park system through limited grant and technical assistance programs and cooperation with partners. The omnibus appropriations law included a total of $2.53 billion for the Park Service for FY2009, with increases of $121.3 million (5%) compared to the Bush Administration’s FY2009 request and $135.1 million (6%) more than the FY2008 enacted level. The law provided increases for most NPS accounts. See Table 10. The Bush Administration’s request would have boosted funding for the major park operations account, but it sought substantial reductions for the 29 For more information on NPS funding in general, contact (name redacted) at 7-..... For more information on funding for historic preservation, contact Shannon Loane at 7-..... Congressional Research Service 21 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations recreation and preservation, construction, and land acquisition line items. A provision of the FY2009 omnibus appropriations law extended the authorization for the NPS Advisory Board for one year, until January 2010. The condition of the national parks and the adequacy of their care and operating capacity continues to be a congressional focus. Some advocacy groups claim that the park system has long experienced chronic budget shortfalls. By one estimate, the national parks operate with two-thirds of needed funding—a budget shortfall of more than $600 million annually.30 To be ready for the NPS’s 100th anniversary in 2016, the Bush Administration had proposed a multi-year initiative, to begin in FY2008, to strengthen visitor services and other park programs. The National Parks Centennial Initiative, announced by President Bush in August 2006, sought to add up to $3 billion in new funds for the parks over 10 years through a public/private joint effort. The initiative had three components: (1) a commitment to add $100.0 million annually in discretionary funds; (2) a challenge for the public to donate $100.0 million annually; and (3) a request that legislation be enacted to establish a mandatory fund with $100.0 million annually to match the public donations. The second part of the initiative—the proposed $1 billion “Centennial Challenge”—would rely on corporate, foundation, and other private donations, raising concerns among some park supporters about potential commercialization and privatization influence on the parks. (See the “Centennial Challenge” section, below.) The stimulus law provided additional funding for three NPS budget accounts. In total, it contained $750.0 million, close to the amount that originally had been supported by the Senate ─ $747.0 million. The House initially had supported a significantly higher level of funding for the NPS ─ $1.80 billion. The House amount had included $100.0 million for the Centennial Challenge program, which was not retained in the law. The largest amount of NPS funding in the stimulus law was for construction, where the $589.0 million provided was more than double the amount included in regular FY2009 appropriations. The funds for construction cover major facility construction, road repair, and equipment replacement, among other programs. See Table 10. The $146.0 million in stimulus funds for park operations covered deferred maintenance of facilities and trails, and other critical repair and rehabilitation projects. Language in the explanatory statement on the bill for both NPS construction and park operations emphasized agency flexibility in determining the allocation among activities, but encouraged projects that will provide the most jobs in the shortest time and create lasting value for the park system. The $15.0 million for historic preservation was exclusively for grants to Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and the law waived matching requirements for grants. 30 See the website of the National Parks Conservation Association at http://www.npca.org/media_center/reports/ analysis.html. Congressional Research Service 22 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Table 10. Appropriations for the National Park Service (NPS), FY2008-FY2009 ($ in millions) FY2008 Approp. FY2009 Requesta FY2009 Omnibusb FY2009 Stimulus FY2009 Total Operation of the National Park System 1,970.6 2,130.7 2,131.5 146.0 2,277.5 —Park Management 1,744.5 1,889.1 1,894.8 n/a n/a —Administrative Costs 139.4 148.1 138.2c n/a n/a —U.S. Park Police 86.7 93.6 98.6d n/a n/a Centennial Challenge (Matching Program)e 24.6 0 0 0 0 National Recreation and Preservationf 67.4 45.5 59.7 0 59.7 Historic Preservation Fundf 70.4 66.1 69.0 15.0 84.0 Construction 218.5 172.5 232.5 589.0 821.5 Land and Water Conservation Fundg -30.0 -30.0 -30.0 0 -30.0 Land Acquisition and State Assistance 69.0 20.8 64.2 0 64.2 —Assistance to States 24.6 -1.0 19.0 0 19.0 —NPS Acquisition 44.4 21.8 45.2 0 45.2 2,390.5 2,404.3 2,525.6 750.0 3,275.6 NPS Total Appropriations a. Includes cancellation of $4.3 million of prior-year funds: $0.8 million for U.S. Park Police, $0.5 million for Historic Preservation, $0.6 million for Construction, $1.0 million for Assistance to States, and $1.3 million for Urban Parks and Recreation. b. Includes cancellation of $3.5 million of prior-year funds: $0.5 million for Historic Preservation, $0.6 million for Construction, $1.0 million for Assistance to States, and $1.3 million for Urban Parks and Recreation. c. Includes savings of $9.9 million through delayed hiring and contracting. d. Includes an additional $2.0 million for inaugural security. e. The FY2009 request figure reflects the fact that the Bush Administration did not seek funding for the matching program through annual appropriations. f. Preserve America funding requested for FY2009 ($10.0 million) is included in the Historic Preservation Fund. For FY2008, funds were included ($7.4 million) in National Recreation and Preservation. g. Figures reflect a rescission of contract authority. Operation of the National Park System The FY2009 omnibus appropriations law provided $2.13 billion to support overall park operations, the same as requested, except that the request included a cancellation of $0.8 million in prior-year Park Police funds. The enacted level was $160.9 million (8%) above the FY2008 level. See Table 10. Operations account funds will support 20,923 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions, an increase of 622 FTEs above FY2008. The law also directed that $99.6 million be targeted specifically for the maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation of constructed park assets and related purposes. As noted, the stimulus law contained an additional $146.0 million for FY2009 for the Operation of the National Park System. The park operations line item is the primary source of funding for the national parks, accounting for nearly 85% of the total NPS budget. The majority of operations funding is provided directly to park managers. It supports the activities, programs, and services essential to the day-to-day Congressional Research Service 23 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations operations of the park system, and covers resource protection, visitors’ services, facility operations and maintenance, and park support programs, as well as such administrative expenses as employee pay, benefits, and other fixed costs. The FY2008 law incorporated the U.S. Park Police account into the operations line item. United States Park Police (USPP) The FY2009 omnibus law appropriated $98.6 million for the USPP, under the park operations account, including $2.0 million specifically for security for the Presidential Inauguration. The total is an increase of $5.0 million (5%) above the request (after the requested cancellation of $0.8 million in prior-year funds) and $11.8 million (14%) above FY2008. The funding is directed to supporting additional recruits during 2009; as of the end January 2008, the number of sworn USPP officers had fallen to a 20-year low of 576. The USPP is an urban-oriented, full-service, uniformed law enforcement entity with primary jurisdiction at park sites within the metropolitan areas of Washington, DC, New York City, and San Francisco. USPP law enforcement authority extends to all NPS units and to certain other federal and state lands. The USPP also assists other law enforcement agencies during emergencies. The USPP support approximately 1,500 law enforcement trained and commissioned park rangers and 400 seasonal law enforcement rangers working in park units system-wide. A report by the DOI Inspector General cited serious deficiencies in USPP leadership, staffing, training, and equipment.31 The report charged that the force was failing to adequately perform its expanded security duties for the icon parks and monuments as well as other law enforcement obligations, including patrol functions, dignitary protection, and special events and crowd management. Since the release of the OIG report, the USPP Chief was reassigned and the senior level commanders retired. A former USPP Major was brought out of retirement to serve as Acting Chief,32 and in December 2008 was appointed permanently. Centennial Challenge As discussed above, the Bush Administration proposed a three-part National Parks Centennial Initiative, with additional discretionary funding for park operations, and a Centennial Challenge program consisting of public donations and federal funds to match the donations. President Bush’s FY2009 budget requested $100.0 million in mandatory spending, which has not been authorized by Congress to date. Neither the FY2009 omnibus law nor the stimulus law provided funding for the Centennial Challenge. Congress had provided $24.6 million as seed money for the Centennial Challenge in the FY2008 appropriations law, to be matched by equal private contributions. The FY2008 appropriations law, and language in the House Appropriations Committee report on the FY2008 Interior Appropriations bill (H.Rept. 110-187), directed that the Challenge money be used for signature projects, not for core operations or for projects that commercialize parks, and that the NPS must 31 U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Office of Inspector General, Assessment of the United States Park Police, PI-EV-NPS0001-2007 (Washington, DC: February 2008). 32 Testimony of James Austin, Fraternal Order of Police, United States Park Police Labor Committee, “Restoring the Federal Land Management Workforce,” before U.S. Congress, House Natural Resources Committee, Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands, March 19, 2009. Congressional Research Service 24 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations control all projects. The Park Service has begun work on a number of projects funded through the Centennial Challenge. National Recreation and Preservation The omnibus appropriations law included $59.7 million for FY2009 for National Recreation and Preservation (NR&P), $14.2 million (31%) more than the Bush Administration’s request and $7.7 million (11%) less than FY2008. The reduction from FY2008 reflected the inclusion in FY2008, in the NR&P line item, of $7.4 million for the Preserve America grant program. The program had been traditionally funded elsewhere ─ in the Historic Preservation Fund. (See below.) NR&P funds a variety of park system recreation, natural and cultural resource protection programs, environmental and compliance review, and an international park affairs office, as well as programs connected with state and local community efforts to preserve natural, historic, and cultural resources. The FY2009 omnibus law provided $15.7 million for the heritage partnerships program that supports the national heritage areas (NHAs). This was an increase of $8.6 million (121%) above the request and $0.4 million (3%) above FY2008. The increase from FY2008 was for $148,000 in planning funds for each of the three newly authorized NHAs. In the explanatory statement on the bill, the Appropriations Committees expressed concerns about the expanding numbers of NHAs, and favored funding new areas principally by savings when mature programs graduate from federal support. They directed the NPS to develop new guidelines for financial self-sufficiency for all NHAs. The omnibus appropriations law included $5.6 million for statutory and contractual aid and directed specified allocations among the 10 recipients. This was $1.9 million (25%) less than the FY2008 enacted. As in recent years, the Bush Administration had proposed discontinuing this program. Under the program, limited financial assistance is provided through partnerships to natural, historical, cultural, or recreational areas not managed by the NPS, in support of the NPS mission to work with other agencies and state and local organizations to promote systems of parks and open space nationwide. Historic Preservation The Historic Preservation Fund (HPF), administered by the NPS, provides grants-in-aid for activities specified in the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA; 16 U.S.C. §470), such as restoring historic districts, sites, buildings, and objects significant in American history and culture. NHPA was reauthorized (P.L. 109-453) on December 22, 2006, extending the funding authority through 2015. The Fund’s preservation grants are normally funded on a 60% federal/40% state matching share basis. The HPF also includes funding for Save America’s Treasures, a grant program for preservation and/or conservation work on nationally significant intellectual and cultural artifacts and historic structures and sites. The omnibus appropriations law provided $69.0 million for the HPF, compared to a FY2008 level of $70.4 million, representing a 2% decrease, but a 4% increase over the FY2009 request of $66.1 million. See Table 10. The law increased funding for state and tribal historic preservation grants by $3.1 million (8%) and $0.6 million (9%) respectively. Funding for Save America’s Treasures was decreased by $4.6 million, down 19% from the $24.6 million appropriated in FY2008. The Preserve America grant program—traditionally funded through the HPF but funded through Congressional Research Service 25 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations National Recreation and Preservation in FY2008—was not funded in the FY2009 appropriations. Instead, the explanatory statement on the bill called for an evaluation of the program’s effectiveness before further funding was committed. Funding for the National Inventory of Historic Properties, a proposed program to help states and tribal governments create an integrated inventory of historic properties, was not included in the FY2009 appropriations. The FY2009 Bush Administration budget request had included $3.0 million for the program, of which $2.0 million would have funded grants through the HPF and the balance would have been provided through the National Recreation and Preservation account. A $5.0 million proposal for a similar program was included in the Bush Administration’s FY2008 request, but was not funded. In the stimulus law, an additional $15.0 million was included for competitive grants to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) for the preservation of campus buildings listed in the National Register of Historic Places.33 Construction The FY2009 omnibus appropriations law provided $232.5 million for the NPS construction budget, a substantial boost ($60.1 million, 35%) above the request and $14.0 million (6%) above FY2008. The Construction line item funds new construction projects, as well as improvements, repair, rehabilitation, and replacement of park facilities. DOI estimates deferred maintenance for the NPS for FY2008 at between $8.23 billion and $12.11 billion, with a mid-range figure of $10.17 billion. The additional $589.0 million for NPS construction provided in the stimulus law, as well as the additional $146.0 million in the law for the Operation of the National Park System, was expected to address some of this backlog. Land Acquisition and State Assistance The omnibus appropriations law provided $64.2 million under the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). Funding was provided for NPS land acquisition and state assistance. For NPS land acquisition, the FY2009 enacted level was $45.2 million, $23.4 million (107%) above the Administration’s request and $0.8 million (2%) above the FY2008 appropriations. Land acquisition funds are used to acquire lands, or interests in lands, for inclusion within the National Park System. This account also includes money to buy inholdings—the private lands within park boundaries. For LWCF state assistance, the Bush Administration had, as in past years, requested no funds for FY2009. The FY2009 enacted level was $19.0 million, $5.6 million (23%) less than the FY2008 level. State assistance is for recreation-related land acquisition and recreation planning and development by the states, with the appropriated funds allocated among the states by formula and the states determining their spending priorities. (For more information, see the “Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)” section in this report.) CRS Report RL33617, Historic Preservation: Background and Funding, by (name redacted). 33 Funding for the HBCU historic preservation grant program was not included in FY2007 through FY2009 appropriations. In FY2006, $3.0 million was appropriated for the program, which was established under the Omnibus Parks and Public Lands Management Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-333). Congressional Research Service 26 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations CRS Report RL33525, Recreation on Federal Lands, by Kori Calvert, (name redacted), and (name redacted). For further information on the National Park Service, see its website at http://www.nps.gov/. For further information on Historic Preservation, see its website at http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/. U.S. Geological Survey34 The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is a science agency that provides physical and biological information related to natural hazards; certain aspects of the environment; and energy, mineral, water, and biological sciences. In addition, it is the federal government’s principal civilian mapping agency and a primary source of data on the quality of the nation’s water resources. Funds for the USGS are provided in the line item Surveys, Investigations, and Research for eight activities: Geographic Research, Investigations, and Remote Sensing; Geologic Hazards, Resources, and Processes; Water Resources Investigations; Biological Research; Enterprise Information; Science Support; Facilities; and Global Climate Change Research. The FY2009 omnibus appropriations law provided $1.04 billion for the USGS, which was $37.3 million (4%) over the FY2008 enacted level of $1.01 billion and $75.3 million (8%) over the FY2009 request of $968.5 million. With the exception of Geographic Research, Investigations, and Remote Sensing, funding for all USGS programs remained about the same or increased beyond FY2008 levels. See Table 11. As detailed below, the FY2009 omnibus appropriations law provided a $33.2 million increase over FY2008 appropriations for global climate change research, and contained $40.2 million for satellite operations related to the Landsat Program. It provided $6.5 million for the water resources research institutes, which the Bush Administration had zeroed out in its FY2009 request. Further, the law included $79.2 million for geologic resource assessments, reversing a proposed reduction of $24.6 million for the mineral resources assessment portion of this program. The stimulus law provided an additional $140.0 million to the USGS for a variety of activities including the repair and construction of facilities, upgrades to streamgages, seismic and volcano monitoring systems, national map activities, and other critical activities that improve the Nation’s science capacity. 34 For more information on USGS funding, contact (name redacted) at 7-..... Congressional Research Service 27 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Table 11. Appropriations for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), FY2008-FY2009 ($ in millions) U.S. Geological Survey FY2008 FY2009 FY2009 FY2009 FY2009 Approp. Request Omnibus Stimulus Total Enterprise Information 110.4 112.1 112.5 n/a n/a Geographic Research, Investigations, and Remote Sensing 77.7 73.1 72.3 n/a n/a Geologic Hazards, Resources, and Processes 243.5 208.0 242.1 n/a n/a Water Resources Investigations 220.5 203.0 221.4 n/a n/a Biological Research 179.9 180.3 185.3 n/a n/a Science Support 67.2 67.2 67.4 n/a n/a Facilities 100.0 98.1 102.1 n/a n/a 7.4 26.6 40.6 n/a n/a 1,006.5 968.5 1,043.8 140.0 1,183.8 Global Climate Change Research Total Appropriations Enterprise Information The Enterprise Information Program consolidates funding of all USGS information needs including information technology, security, services, and resources management, as well as capital asset planning. The FY2009 omnibus appropriations law provided $112.5 million for this program, $2.1 million above the FY2008 level. There are three primary programs within Enterprise Information: (1) enterprise information security and technology, which supports management and operations of USGS telecommunications (e.g., computing infrastructure and email); (2) enterprise information resources, which provides policy support, information management, and oversight over information services; and (3) national geospatial program, which provides operational support and management for the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). The FGDC is an interagency, intergovernmental committee that encourages collaboration to make geospatial data available to state, local, and tribal governments, as well as communities. Geographic Research, Investigations, and Remote Sensing This program aims to provide public access to high quality geospatial information. The FY2009 omnibus appropriations law included $72.3 million for this program, $5.4 million below the FY2008 level. The omnibus appropriations law provided a total of $40.2 million for the Landsat program, comprised of $24.2 million for the Landsat Data Continuity Mission, also known as Landsat 8, and $16.0 million to continue the Landsat 5 and 7 program. Landsat 8 is a satellite that is being developed to take remotely sensed images of the Earth’s land surface and surrounding coastal areas primarily for environmental monitoring. Landsat 5 and 7 are satellites currently providing data of the Earth’s natural systems. The explanatory statement on the bill specified that funds for future satellite development and launch costs associated with Landsat should not be transferred to the USGS from NASA, until a new plan for future land imaging and remote sensing coordination and funding is completed. Congressional Research Service 28 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Geologic Hazards, Resources, and Processes For Geologic Hazards, Resources, and Processes activities, the FY2009 omnibus law appropriated $242.1 million, $1.3 million below the FY2008 level. This line item covers programs in three activities: Hazard Assessments ($90.6 million), Landscape and Coastal Assessments ($72.4 million), and Resource Assessments ($79.2 million). The volcano hazards program received $23.9 million for FY2009, an increase of $1.7 million over FY2008. The explanatory statement on the FY2009 omnibus bill noted that volcano research and monitoring needs should be evaluated at active areas such as Hawaii, Yellowstone, the Cascades, and Alaska. The Bush Administration’s request included an $8.2 million increase over FY2008 levels to support a water census component of the Water for America Initiative with the Bureau of Reclamation. In the Landscapes and Coastal Assessments program, funds for the water census were not provided for FY2009. The explanatory statement directed the Administration to submit a more integrated program request for the next budget cycle. The FY2009 omnibus law contained funding for mineral resource assessments, although none had been recommended by the Bush Administration as in previous years. According to the Bush Administration, universities or other entities would undertake assessments and research that support nonfederal needs. In all years Congress retained funding for the program. Water Resources Investigations The FY2009 omnibus law appropriated $221.4 million for this program, $0.8 million above the FY2008 level. Funding for water resources research at universities was included. This countered a Bush Administration request that sought to discontinue USGS support for water resources research institutes because, according to the Bush Administration, most institutes have succeeded in leveraging sufficient funding for program activities from non-USGS sources. Of the $221.4 million, $65.1 million was included for the National Water Quality Assessment. This was an increase of $1.1 million over FY2008, and countered a Bush Administration request to reduce funding by $9.8 million from the FY2008 level. The Groundwater Resources Program was funded at $9.0 million. While this program did not include funding for the Water for America Initiative, it will support that Initiative by helping to assess water availability and water quality and conducting region-specific assessments of ground water. However, the explanatory statement on the bill noted that a revamped proposal for the Initiative should be presented in the FY2010 budget cycle. Also, there was a $2.0 million increase for the streamgage program over FY2008, for a total of $22.4 million for the National Streamflow Information Program for FY2009. Streamgage replacement and upgrades were included as projects for funds in the stimulus law. Biological Research The Biological Research Program generates and distributes information related to conserving and managing the nation’s biological resources. The FY2009 omnibus appropriations law provided $185.3 million for this program, a $5.5 million increase over FY2008. The program funds work in focal areas that will support DOI’s science strategies, including research on effects of climate change on wildfires and ecosystems, large river ecosystem processes and habitat, vertebrate Congressional Research Service 29 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations diseases and impacts, gap analysis35 and taxonomic research, and adaptive management. Under this program, funding was provided for priority ecosystems located in the Greater Everglades, Chesapeake Bay, San Francisco Bay, and Mojave Desert. The omnibus law also moved funding for priority ecosystem science from other activities to the Biological Research Program. Science Support and Facilities Science Support focuses on those costs associated with modernizing the infrastructure for managing and disseminating scientific information. The omnibus appropriations law provided $67.4 million for FY2009, similar to the FY2008 enacted level. Facilities focuses on the costs for maintenance and repair. The FY2009 omnibus law included $102.1 million, $2.2 million above the FY2008 level. The additional $140.0 million provided to the USGS in the stimulus law was for repair, construction, and restoration of facilities, among other purposes. Global Climate Change Research The FY2009 omnibus law combined most of the climate change activities of the USGS into an integrated global climate change research program. It provided $40.6 million for this program, an increase of $33.2 million over FY2008 in part through internal budget transfers. In total, USGS received $45.5 million for climate change science in FY2009, an increase of $12.0 million over total funds for FY2008. Work under the climate change research program seeks to provide science, monitoring, and predictive modeling to generate information on climate changes and its effect on the resources and landscape of the United States. Specifically, scientists will continue to track indicators of climate change and link them to effects. Further, work is planned to develop decision support tools for policy makers and resource managers to develop and implement adaptation strategies. Some specific projects will concentrate on the effects of climate change on forest carbon storage, the use of glaciers as indicators of climate change, ecosystem modeling, and the effects of climate change on the Yukon River Basin. The FY2009 omnibus law included $10.0 million for a new National Global Warming and Wildlife Science Center. The explanatory statement expressed that the Center should develop mechanisms to ensure its responsiveness to the research and management needs of federal and state agencies regarding impacts of climate change on fish, wildlife, plants, and ecosystems. The Center also was tasked with studying mechanisms for adaptation to climate change and mitigation of its impacts. The explanatory statement recommended that the Secretary of the Interior, with the assistance of the Center and a scientific advisory board, develop a national strategy to assist plants, wildlife, and ecosystems to adapt and become resilient to climate change. It encouraged collaboration with other federal, state, and private stakeholders in developing this strategy. Further, the law contained at least $3.0 million for geological and biological carbon sequestration studies under this heading, according to the explanatory statement. For further information on the U.S. Geological Survey, see its website at http://www.usgs.gov/. 35 Gap analysis identifies the degree to which native animal species and plant communities are represented in federal lands. Congressional Research Service 30 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations Minerals Management Service36 The Minerals Management Service (MMS) administers two programs: the Offshore Energy and Minerals Management (OEMM) Program and the Minerals Revenue Management (MRM) Program. OEMM administers competitive leasing on Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) lands and oversees production of offshore oil, gas, other minerals, and offshore alternative energy. On April 22, 2009, the Obama Administration announced that regulations for the administration of alternative energy leases in the OCS had been finalized.37 MRM collects and disburses bonuses, rents, and royalties paid on federal onshore and OCS leases and Indian mineral leases. Revenues from onshore leases are distributed to states in which they were collected, the general fund of the U.S. Treasury, and designated programs. Revenues from the offshore leases are allocated among the coastal states, the Land and Water Conservation Fund, the Historic Preservation Fund, and the U.S. Treasury. MMS collected and disbursed about $23.5 billion in revenue in FY2008 from mineral leases on federal and Indian lands. This amount fluctuates annually based primarily on the prices of oil and natural gas. For about a decade prior to FY2007, royalties from natural gas production accounted for 40% to 45% of annual MMS receipts, while oil royalties were not more than 25%. However, in FY2007, oil royalties accounted for about 39% of MMS receipts. In FY2008, royalties from natural gas and oil leases contributed about 25% each, while record bonus bids accounted for about 44% of MMS receipts. Other sources of MMS receipts include rents for all leaseable minerals and royalties from coal and other minerals. Budget and Appropriations The FY2009 funding level for MMS was $310.4 million (gross funding level), composed of: $116.7 million in appropriations (net funding level); $146.7 million in offsetting collections, which the MMS has been retaining since 1994; and $47.0 million in state cost sharing deductions. See Table 12. This was an increase in the gross funding level of $13.6 million (5%) from the FY2008 level of $296.8 million, but a decrease of $1.4 million (1%) from FY2008 total net funding of $118.1 million. For FY2009, the Bush Administration had sought gross funding of $307.1 million FY2009 or a $160.4 net funding level. The Bush Administration’s net funding request was much higher than the amount enacted for FY2009 because the $47.0 million deduction for royalty cost-sharing with the states was not included in the Administration’s request. Table 12. Appropriations for the Minerals Management Service (MMS), FY2008-FY2009 ($ in millions) Minerals Management Service FY2008 Approp. FY2009 Request FY2009 Omnibus Royalty and Offshore Minerals Management 36 37 For more information on MMS funding, contact (name redacted) at 7-..... For details on the content and status of the regulations, see the MMS website at http://www.mms.gov. Congressional Research Service 31 Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies: FY2009 Appropriations —OCS Lands (OEMM) 161.3 164.0 166.2 —Royalty Management (MRM) 81.7 86.0 86.7 —General Administration 47.5 51.0 51.2 —Gross, Royalty and Offshore Minerals Management 290.5 301.0 304.1 —Use of Receipts and Cost Recovery Fees -135.7 -146.7 -146.7 Subtotal, Royalty and Offshore Minerals Management Appropriations 154.8 154.3 157.4 6.3 6.1 6.3 —State Royalty Administrative Cost Deduction -43.0 0 -47.0 Total Appropriations 118.1 160.4 116.7 Oil Spill Research Administrative Provisions Oil and Gas Leasing Offshore Issues not directly tied to specific funding accounts remain controversial. Oil and gas development moratoria in the OCS along the Atlantic and Pacific Coasts, parts of Alaska, and the Gulf of Mexico had been in place since 1982, as a result of public laws and executive orders of the President. On July 14, 2008, President Bush lifted the executive moratoria, which included MMS Planning areas along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. In the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2009, Congress removed the annual moratoria provisions that included the Atlantic and Pacific coasts; these coastal areas could now be made available for future oil and gas development. An OCS morato [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3ARL34461. Public record. Not legal advice.