Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                       Calendar No. 493
104th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE

  2d Session                                                    104-318
_______________________________________________________________________


 
DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 1997

                                _______
                                

                 July 11, 1996.--Ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


Mr. Bond, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 3666]

    The Committee on Appropriations to which was referred the 
bill (H.R. 3666) making appropriations for the Departments of 
Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and for 
sundry independent agencies, boards, commissions, corporations, 
and offices for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1997, and 
for other purposes, reports the same to the Senate with 
amendments and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.

Amount of new budget (obligational) authority

Amount of bill as recommended in House.................. $83,995,260,000
Amount of change by Committee...........................    +714,429,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
Amount of bill as reported to Senate....................  84,709,689,000
Amount of appropriations to date, 1996..................  82,641,085,000
Amount of budget estimates, 1997........................  87,496,966,000
    Under estimates for 1997............................   2,787,277,000
    Above appropriations for 1996.......................   2,068,604,000

                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
Title I--Department of Veterans Affairs..........................     5
Title II--Department of Housing and Urban Development............    28
Title III--Independent agencies:
    American Battle Monuments Commission.........................    51
    Department of the Treasury: Community development financial 
      institutions...............................................    51
    Consumer Product Safety Commission...........................    52
    Corporation for National and Community Service...............    53
    Office of Inspector General..................................    54
    U.S. Court of Veterans Appeals...............................    54
    Cemeterial expenses, Army....................................    55
    Environmental Protection Agency..............................    55
    Executive Office of the President: Office of Science and 
      Technology Pol- icy........................................    77
    Council on Environmental Quality and Office of Environmental 
      Quality....................................................    78
    Federal Emergency Management Agency..........................    78
    General Services Administration: Consumer Information Center.    85
    Department of Health and Human Services: Office of Consumer 
      Affairs....................................................    85
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration................    86
    National Credit Union Administration.........................    91
    National Science Foundation..................................    92
    Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation........................    96
    Selective Service System.....................................    97
Title IV--General provisions.....................................    99
Title V--Supplemental appropriation..............................   102
                              INTRODUCTION

    The Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban 
Development and Independent Agencies appropriations bill for 
fiscal year 1997 embodies a comprehensive and systematic 
restructuring of Federal programs and activities within its 
jurisdiction.
    As recommended by the Committee, this bill attempts to 
provide a fair and balanced approach to the many competing 
programs and activities under the VA-HUD subcommittee's 
jurisdiction, within the constraints imposed by a very tight 
budget allocation. The Committee made a conscious effort to 
avoid reopening past disagreements and controversies which 
blocked enactment of this bill last year. By pursuing this 
measured and deliberate course, expeditious consideration of 
this measure and enactment before the start of the fiscal year 
should be possible.
    The Committee recommendation provides $39,070,731,000 for 
the Department of Veterans Affairs, including full funding for 
VA medical care, and an increase for VA research. VA medical 
programs were afforded the highest priority in order to ensure 
quality care to all veterans currently being served by the VA 
and to ensure a smooth transition to the new organizational 
structure and its emphasis on managed care.
    For the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the 
Committee's recommendation continues policy and programmatic 
reforms enacted last year. The Committee strongly supports 
enactment of a comprehensive public and assisted housing reform 
bill under the jurisdiction of the authorizing committee. This 
appropriations bill, however, contains temporary extensions of 
provisions needed to halt the ever-increasing cost of housing 
subsidy commitments.
    Similarly, this appropriations bill complements the 
multifamily housing restructuring proposals now under 
consideration by the authorizing committee. The excessive 
subsidies necessary to sustain this inventory of nearly 1 
million units of low-income housing cannot be continued within 
the constraints of a balanced budget plan for discretionary 
spending. Unless Congress acts to provide a process to deal 
with the excessive debt of this housing inventory, there could 
be massive defaults and substantial resident displacement.
    The bill provides additional funding to preserve housing 
occupied by low-income families in developments which could 
prepay their subsidized mortgages and convert to market rates. 
The bill as recommended by the Committee provides 
$19,664,845,000 for the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development. Perhaps more importantly, the increases proposed 
by the Committee are focused toward activities which prevent 
the displacement of currently assisted families through 
contract renewals and housing preservation payments.
    The Committee-reported bill also restores funding for the 
Community Development Block Grants Program [CDBG] at the full 
current fiscal year 1996 funding level of $4,600,000,000. In 
addition, the HOME program is also maintained at it current 
$1,400,000,000 level.
    For the Environmental Protection Agency, the Committee 
recommendation totals $6,598,172,000, an increase of 
$70,145,000 over the current fiscal year, with increases in 
such areas as Superfund and drinking water State revolving 
funds.
    The Committee's recommendation does not include any so-
called riders for EPA in order to minimize the potential for 
controversy or extended disputes.
    The bill provides the President's full request for the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency, and, in addition, restores 
$1,000,000,000 disaster relief funds which were rescinded as 
part of the Omnibus Consolidated Rescission and Appropriations 
Act for 1996. FEMA anticipates these funds will be needed to 
meet ongoing disaster relief requirements and the Committee 
strongly supports full funding of these critical assistance 
activities.
    The Committee recommendation for National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration totals $13,704,200,000, an increase of 
$100,000,000 over the House allowance. The Committee recommends 
restoration of funds for the Mission to Planet Earth Program. 
For the National Science Foundation, the Committee recommends 
$3,275,000,000. While a modest increase of $55,000,000 over the 
1996 level and $17,000,000 over the House allowance, it does 
reflect the Committee's commitment to support of high-priority 
basic research and technology development activities, 
notwithstanding our growing budgetary constraints.
                TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Appropriations, 1996

                                                         $38,372,807,000

Budget estimate, 1997

                                                          38,838,849,000

House allowance

                                                          38,895,588,000

Committee recommendation

                                                          39,070,731,000

                          GENERAL DESCRIPTION

    The Veterans Administration was established as an 
independent agency by Executive Order 5398 of July 21, 1930, in 
accordance with the Act of July 3, 1930 (46 Stat. 1016). This 
act authorized the President to consolidate and coordinate 
Federal agencies especially created for or concerned with the 
administration of laws providing benefits to veterans, 
including the Veterans' Bureau, the Bureau of Pensions, and the 
National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers. On March 15, 
1989, VA was elevated to Cabinet-level status as the Department 
of Veterans Affairs.
    The VA's mission is to serve America's veterans and their 
families as their principal advocate in ensuring that they 
receive the care, support, and recognition they have earned in 
service to the Nation. The VA's operating units include the 
Veterans Health Administration, Veterans Benefits 
Administration, National Cemetery System, and staff offices.
    The Veterans Health Administration develops, maintains, and 
operates a national health care delivery system for eligible 
veterans; carries out a program of education and training of 
health care personnel; carries out a program of medical 
research and development; and furnishes health services to 
members of the Armed Forces during periods of war or national 
emergency. A system of 173 medical centers, 404 outpatient 
clinics, 135 nursing homes, and 39 domiciliaries is maintained 
to meet the VA's medical mission.
    The Veterans Benefits Administration provides an integrated 
program of nonmedical veteran benefits. This Administration 
administers a broad range of benefits to veterans and other 
eligible beneficiaries through 58 regional offices and the 
records processing center in St. Louis, MO. The benefits 
provided include: compensation for service-connected 
disabilities; pensions for wartime, needy, and totally disabled 
veterans; vocational rehabilitation assistance; educational and 
training assistance; home buying assistance; estate protection 
services for veterans under legal disability; information and 
assistance through personalized contacts; and six life 
insurance programs.
    The National Cemetery System provides for the interment in 
any national cemetery with available grave space the remains of 
eligible deceased servicepersons and discharged veterans; 
permanently maintains these graves; marks graves of eligible 
persons in national and private cemeteries; and administers the 
grant program for aid to States in establishing, expanding, or 
improving State veterans' cemeteries. The National Cemetery 
System includes 148 cemeterial installations and activities.
    Other VA offices, including the general counsel, inspector 
general, Boards of Contract Appeals and Veterans Appeals, and 
the general administration, support the Secretary, Deputy 
Secretary, Under Secretary for Health, Under Secretary for 
Benefits, and the Director of the National Cemetery System.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $39,070,731,000 for the Department 
of Veterans Affairs, including $20,259,993,000 in mandatory 
spending and $18,810,738,000 in discretionary spending. The 
amount provided for discretionary activities represents an 
increase of $481,282,000 above the current estimate, a decrease 
of $91,523,000 below the budget request, and $148,262,000 below 
the House amount.
    The Committee's recommendation for the Department of 
Veterans Affairs reflects its support for and commitment to the 
reorganization of the Veterans Health Administration and its 
new orientation to managed care and the provision of health 
care services in ambulatory care settings. Indeed, the 
Committee's recommendation for VA medical care accounts for 
almost one-half of the new outlays available to the VA-HUD 
Subcommittee.
    An increase of $444,447,000 has been recommended for VA 
medical care, and an increase of $5,000,000 has been 
recommended for VA research in view of the importance of this 
program to the VA medical care system.
    The Committee notes that under the President's out-year 
budget plan, which would reduce VA medical programs to 
$13,000,000,000 by the year 2000, VA would be unable to provide 
comprehensive health care services to the 2.8 million veterans 
currently served. Indeed, according to the VA Secretary, the 
President's plan would result in the closure of 41 VA hospitals 
and the denial of care to hundreds of thousands of veterans. As 
per the concurrent resolution on the budget, the Committee does 
not expect such cuts to be applied to the VA.
    In conjunction with the changes taking place within VHA, 
the Committee has recommended major construction funding only 
for outpatient, research, and cemetery projects. 
Notwithstanding the very compelling need at some of the 
facilities for which major construction renovation funding has 
been requested, it is expected that the relative need for such 
projects may be impacted by the reorganization. The Committee 
has approved full funding for minor construction, to ensure 
that all code, health and safety, space deficiencies, and other 
critical requirements are addressed. Also, the Committee has 
restored the administration's proposed reduction to the State 
nursing home construction grant program, a cost-effective means 
of providing long-term care to elderly veterans.
    In view of the substantial mismanagement within the 
Veterans Benefits Administration and its reluctance to adopt 
strategic approaches to improving service to veterans, the 
Committee has not recommended the full request for general 
operating expenses. The recommended reduction is not intended 
to impact negatively service to veterans; it is intended to 
send a strong message to VBA that change is imperative, and the 
status quo is unacceptable. No reductions are recommended to 
VBA staffing levels below the President's request.
    Finally, the Committee has recommended the full request for 
the National Cemetery Program to ensure the resting grounds of 
more than 2 million veterans are maintained appropriately to 
honor, recognize, and commemorate veterans' service.

                    Veterans Benefits Administration

                       compensation and pensions

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1996.................................... $18,331,561,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................  18,497,854,000
House allowance.........................................  18,497,854,000

Committee recommendation

                                                          18,671,259,000

                          program description

    Compensation is payable to living veterans who have 
suffered impairment of earning power from service-connected 
disabilities. The amount of compensation is based upon the 
impact of disabilities on earning capacity. Death compensation 
or dependency and indemnity compensation is payable to the 
surviving spouses and dependents of veterans whose deaths occur 
while on active duty or result from service-connected 
disabilities. A clothing allowance may also be provided for 
service-connected veterans who use a prosthetic or orthopedic 
device.
    Pensions are an income security benefit payable to needy 
wartime veterans who are precluded from gainful employment due 
to non-service-connected disabilities which render them 
permanently and totally disabled. Under the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1990, veterans 65 years of age or older 
are no longer considered permanently and totally disabled by 
law and are thus subject to a medical evaluation. Death 
pensions are payable to needy surviving spouses and children of 
deceased wartime veterans. The rate payable for both disability 
and death pensions is determined on the basis of the annual 
income of the veteran or his survivors.
    This account also funds burial benefits and miscellaneous 
assistance.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee has provided $18,671,259,000 for compensation 
and pensions. This is an increase of $339,698,000 over the 
current budget, and an increase of $173,405,000 above the 
original budget estimate and the House amount. The 
recommendation reflects the Department's current estimate for 
compensation and pension requirements in fiscal year 1997. An 
increase in the average retroactive payment and an increase in 
the number of retroactive payees account for the upward 
revision to the original estimate.
    The estimated caseload and cost by program follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                1996               1997            Difference   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caseload:                                                                                                       
    Compensation:                                                                                               
        Veterans.......................................         2,241,000          2,252,100            +11,100 
        Survivors......................................           305,700            303,800             -1,900 
        Clothing allowance (nonadd)....................           (65,600)           (65,900)             (+300)
    Pensions:                                                                                                   
        Veterans.......................................           422,700            413,000             -9,700 
        Survivors......................................           340,800            320,700            -20,100 
        Vocational training (nonadd)...................              (125)              (110)              (-15)
    Burial allowances..................................           102,600            101,500             -1,100 
Funds:                                                                                                          
    Compensation:                                                                                               
        Veterans.......................................   $12,092,733,000    $12,259,159,000      +$166,426,000 
        Survivors......................................     3,144,800,000      3,141,800,000         -3,000,000 
        Clothing allowance.............................        32,989,000         33,141,000           +152,000 
        Payment to GOE (Public Laws 101-508 and 102-                                                            
         568)..........................................         2,105,000          2,098,000             -7,000 
    Pensions:                                                                                                   
        Veterans.......................................     2,289,569,000      2,302,800,000        +13,231,000 
        Survivors......................................       804,400,000        787,400,000        -17,000,000 
    Vocational training................................           366,000            332,000            -34,000 
    Payment to GOE (Public Laws 101-508, 102-568, and                                                           
     103-446)..........................................        11,630,000         10,078,000         -1,552,000 
    Payment to medical care (Public Laws 101-508 and                                                            
     102-568)..........................................        11,445,000         14,241,000         +2,796,000 
    Payment to medical facilities......................         2,188,000          2,254,000            +66,000 
    Burial benefits....................................       114,794,000        116,147,000         +1,353,000 
    Other assistance...................................         1,811,000          1,809,000             -2,000 
    Unobligated balance and transfers..................      -177,269,000   .................      +177,269,000 
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total appropriation..............................    18,331,561,000     18,671,259,000       +339,698,000 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The appropriation includes $26,417,000 in payments to the 
``General operating expenses'' and ``Medical care'' accounts 
for expenses related to implementing provisions of the Omnibus 
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, the Veterans' Benefits Act 
of 1992, and the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994. 
The amount provided includes funds for a proposed cost-of-
living increase of 2.8 percent for pension recipients.
    Also, the bill includes language permitting this 
appropriation to reimburse such sums as may be necessary, 
estimated at $2,254,000, to the medical facilities revolving 
fund to help defray the operating expenses of individual 
medical facilities for nursing home care provided to pensioners 
as authorized by the Veterans' Benefits Act of 1992.
    As in the House, the Committee has not included language 
proposed by the administration that would provide indefinite 
1997 supplemental appropriations for compensation and pension 
payments.

                         readjustment benefits

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $1,345,300,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   1,227,000,000
House allowance.........................................   1,227,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           1,377,000,000

                          program description

    The readjustment benefits appropriation finances the 
education and training of veterans and servicepersons whose 
initial entry on active duty took place on or after July 1, 
1985. These benefits are included in the All-Volunteer Force 
Educational Assistance Program (Montgomery GI bill) authorized 
under 38 U.S.C. 30. Eligibility to receive this assistance 
began in 1987. Basic benefits are funded through appropriations 
made to the readjustment benefits appropriation. Supplemental 
benefits are also provided to certain veterans and this funding 
is available from transfers from the Department of Defense. 
This account also finances vocational rehabilitation, specially 
adapted housing grants, automobile grants with the associated 
approved adaptive equipment for certain disabled veterans, and 
finances educational assistance allowances for eligible 
dependents of those veterans who died from service-connected 
causes or have a total permanent service-connected disability 
as well as dependents of servicepersons who were captured or 
missing in action.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee has provided $1,377,000,000 for readjustment 
benefits. The amount provided is an increase of $150,000,000 
over the original budget estimate and the House amount, and an 
increase of $31,700,000 above the enacted level. The 
Department's revised estimate reflects a shortfall experienced 
in the ``Compensation and pension'' account in fiscal year 
1996, and the need to transfer $150,000,000 to that account in 
fiscal year 1996. The Department originally had anticipated 
carryover of $150,000,000 in this account due to lower 
education and training caseload than estimated in 1996. The 
recommended appropriation will provide education and training 
benefits for 526,345 veterans, servicepersons, reservists, or 
dependents.
    The estimated caseload and cost for this account follows:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     1996             1997          Difference  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of trainees:                                                                                             
    Education and training: Dependents.......................           38,668           37,938             -730
    All-Volunteer Force educational assistance:                                                                 
        Veterans and servicepersons..........................          301,776          320,084          +18,308
        Reservists...........................................          114,825          109,243           -5,582
    Vocational rehabilitation................................           54,459           59,080           +4,621
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................          509,728          526,345          +16,617
                                                              ==================================================
Funds:                                                                                                          
    Education and training: Dependents.......................      $98,211,000      $96,267,000      -$1,944,000
    All-Volunteer Force educational assistance:                                                                 
        Veterans and servicepersons..........................      843,907,000      902,867,000      +58,960,000
        Reservists...........................................      113,471,000      110,693,000       -2,778,000
    Vocational rehabilitation................................      348,810,000      388,215,000      +39,405,000
    Housing grants...........................................       16,327,000       16,327,000  ...............
    Automobiles and other conveyances........................        5,615,000        5,615,000  ...............
    Adaptive equipment.......................................       16,433,000       12,506,000       -3,927,000
    Work-study...............................................       34,045,000       38,243,000       +4,198,000
    Payment to States........................................       13,000,000       13,000,000  ...............
    Jobs training (Public Law 102-484).......................         -518,000         -173,000         +345,000
    Balance forward and offsetting collections...............     -296,341,000     -206,560,000      +89,781,000
    Unobligated balance, end of year.........................     +152,340,000  ...............     -152,340,000
    Transfer to compensation and pensions....................     -150,000,000  ...............     +150,000,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
        Total appropriation..................................    1,195,300,000    1,377,000,000     -181,700,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                   veterans insurance and indemnities

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $24,890,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      38,970,000
House allowance.........................................      38,970,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              38,970,000

                          program description

    The veterans insurance and indemnities appropriation is 
made up of the former appropriations for military and naval 
insurance, applicable to World War I veterans; National Service 
Life Insurance, applicable to certain World War II veterans; 
Servicemen's indemnities, applicable to Korean conflict 
veterans; and veterans mortgage life insurance to individuals 
who have received a grant for specially adapted housing.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee has provided $38,970,000 for veterans 
insurance and indemnities, as requested by the administration 
and provided by the House. This is an increase of $14,080,000 
above the current budget. The Department estimates there will 
be 5,135,956 policies in force in fiscal year 1997.

                  guaranty and indemnity program fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996....................    $504,122,000     $65,226,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................     158,643,000     107,703,000
House allowance.........................     158,643,000     105,226,000
Committee recommendation................     158,643,000     105,226,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    This appropriation provides for the cost of direct and 
guaranteed loans, as well as the administrative expenses to 
carry out the direct and guaranteed loan programs, which may be 
transferred to and merged with the general operating expenses 
appropriation.
    The purpose of the VA Home Loan Guaranty Program is to 
facilitate the extension of mortgage credit on favorable terms 
by private lenders to eligible veterans.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends such sums as may be necessary, 
estimated to be $158,643,000 for funding subsidy payments of 
the guaranty and indemnity program fund and $105,226,000 for 
administrative expenses. The administrative expenses may be 
transferred to the ``General operating expenses'' account.
    The increase of $40,000,000 in administrative expenses over 
the 1996 enacted level reflects the Department's decision to 
allocate veterans assistance services [VAS] personnel costs 
across program areas, in lieu of a separate budget for veterans 
services. This better reflects the cost of the Veterans 
Benefits Administration's [VBA] programs, and represents the 
first phase of a long-term initiative to shift all VBA 
administrative and support costs to the five business programs. 
VAS costs previously have been funded entirely in the general 
operating expenses appropriation.

                         loan guaranty program

                     (including transfer of funds)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996....................     $22,950,000     $52,138,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................      14,091,000      33,810,000
House allowance.........................      14,091,000      33,810,000
Committee recommendation................      14,091,000      33,810,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    The ``Loan guaranty program'' account provides for the cost 
of direct and guaranteed loans, pay subsidies, and covers the 
administrative expenses to carry out the direct and guaranteed 
loan programs.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends such sums as may be necessary, 
estimated to be $14,091,000 for funding subsidy payments, and 
$33,810,000 to pay administrative expenses. The administrative 
expenses may be transferred to the ``General operating 
expenses'' account.

                          direct loan program

                     (including transfer of funds)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996....................         $28,000        $459,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................          30,000          80,000
House allowance.........................          30,000          80,000
Committee recommendation................          30,000          80,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    The ``Direct loan program'' account provides funds for 
subsidies to severely disabled veterans for specially adapted 
housing and for administrative expenses to carry out the direct 
loan program.

                        committee recommendation

    The bill includes the requested $300,000 limitation on 
specially adjusted housing loans; such sums as may be necessary 
for subsidy payments, estimated to be $30,000; and $80,000 for 
administrative expenses. The administrative expenses may be 
transferred to the ``General operating expenses'' account.

                      education loan fund program

                     (including transfer of funds)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996....................          $1,000        $195,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................           1,000         204,000
House allowance.........................           1,000         195,000
Committee recommendation................           1,000         195,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    This appropriation covers the cost of direct loans for 
eligible dependents and, in addition, it includes 
administrative expenses necessary to carry out the direct loan 
program. The administrative funds may be transferred to and 
merged with the appropriation for the general operating 
expenses to cover the common overhead expenses.

                        committee recommendation

    The bill includes $1,000 for program costs and $195,000 for 
administrative expenses. The administrative expenses may be 
transferred to and merged with the ``General operating 
expenses'' account. Bill language is included limiting program 
direct loans to $3,000.

                 vocational rehabilitation loan program

                     (including transfer of funds)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996....................         $54,000        $377,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................          49,000         507,000
House allowance.........................          49,000         377,000
Committee recommendation................          49,000         377,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    This appropriation covers the cost of direct loans for 
vocational rehabilitation of eligible veterans and, in 
addition, it includes administrative expenses necessary to 
carry out the direct loan program. Loans of up to $791 (based 
on indexed chapter 31 subsistence allowance rate) are available 
to service-connected disabled veterans enrolled in vocational 
rehabilitation programs as provided under 38 U.S.C. chapter 31 
when the veteran is temporarily in need of additional 
assistance. Repayment is made in 10 monthly installments, 
without interest, through deductions from future payments of 
compensation, pension, subsistence allowance, educational 
assistance allowance, or retirement pay.

                        committee recommendation

    The bill includes the requested $49,000 for program costs 
and $377,000 for administrative expenses. The administrative 
expenses may be transferred to and merged with the ``General 
operating expenses'' account. Bill language is included 
limiting program direct loans to $2,822,000. The House 
recommended a loan limitation of $1,964,000. It is estimated 
that VA will make 6,203 loans in fiscal year 1997, with an 
average amount of $455.

              native american veteran housing loan program

                     (including transfer of funds)

                                                          Administrative
                                                                expenses

Appropriations, 1996 \1\................................        $205,000
Budget estimate, 1997 \1\...............................         434,000
House allowance.........................................         205,000
Committee recommendation................................         205,000

\1\ Subsidy amounts necessary to support this program were appropriated 
in fiscal year 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    This program will test the feasibility of enabling VA to 
make direct home loans to native American veterans who live on 
U.S. trust lands. This program is a 5-year pilot program which 
began in 1993.

                        committee recommendation

    The bill includes $205,000 for administrative expenses 
associated with this program in fiscal year 1997, as in the 
House bill. These funds may be transferred to the ``General 
operating expenses'' account.

                     Veterans Health Administration

                              MEDICAL CARE

Appropriations, 1996.................................... $16,564,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................  17,008,447,000
House allowance.........................................  17,068,447,000
Committee recommendation................................  17,008,447,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Department of Veterans Affairs [VA] operates the 
largest Federal medical care delivery system in the country, 
with 173 hospitals, 39 domiciliaries, 135 nursing homes, and 
404 outpatient clinics which includes independent, satellite, 
community-based, and rural outreach clinics.
    This appropriation provides for medical care and treatment 
of eligible beneficiaries in VA hospitals, nursing homes, 
domiciliaries, and outpatient clinic facilities; contract 
hospitals; State home facilities on a grant basis; contract 
community nursing homes; and through the hometown outpatient 
program, on a fee basis. Hospital and outpatient care also are 
provided for certain dependents and survivors of veterans under 
the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the VA [CHAMPVA]. 
The medical care appropriation also provides for training of 
medical residents and interns and other professional 
paramedical and administrative personnel in health science 
fields to support the Department's and the Nation's health 
manpower demands.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of 
$17,008,447,000 for VA medical care. This represents an 
increase of $444,447,000 over the current level, and will 
enable VA to provide care to all veterans currently receiving 
VA health care services.
    The Committee is very supportive of efforts made within the 
Veterans Health Administration [VHA] to restructure the system 
consistent with modern health care practices. The recently 
implemented veterans integrated services networks [VISN] are 
expected to result in improved quality of care, including 
primary care services for all enrolled veterans, and reduced 
costs through the elimination of wasteful, redundant or 
unnecessary activities. Improvements have already been 
demonstrated, including reduced waiting times for appointments.
    The Committee urges VHA through the VISN's to implement 
aggressively all appropriate cost-saving measures, as 
recommended by the General Accounting Office, the inspector 
general, internal task forces, and others. The Committee has 
not mandated any specific reductions in an effort to provide 
flexibility to the Department, but strongly encourages VHA to 
consider such cost-saving measures as additional consolidations 
and integrations of services, reducing management layers, 
eliminating redundant services, restructuring small hospitals 
or programs, eliminating high cost and low volume programs, 
eliminating some categories of beneficiary travel, and 
improving formulary management.
    The Committee is concerned about the increase in costs 
associated with beneficiary travel payments, a benefit 
typically not offered to patients in the private sector. Costs 
for these benefits have risen over 40 percent in the past 4 
years and continue to rise. At the same time, VA has 
discontinued centralized reporting of beneficiary travel costs, 
making it difficult to ascertain what accounts for such large 
increases. The VA's management improvement task force has 
recommended limiting the extent such payments are made, but 
very little is known about the recipients of these payments and 
the potential impact of redirecting these resources to direct 
patient care.
    To obtain a better understanding the use of beneficiary 
travel payments, the Committee directs VA to submit a report 
within 60 days of enactment of this act summarizing: (1) the 
number of veteran and nonveteran (attendant) recipients of and 
claims for beneficiary travel payments by category of travel; 
(2) the associated costs by category of travel; (3) the number 
of claims for inpatient and outpatient purposes; (4) the 
eligibility basis for the recipients of beneficiary travel; and 
(5) the potential impacts of eliminating one or more categories 
of beneficiary travel. Any available information on whether the 
veteran was traveling from a rural area or to participate in a 
special health care program such as research, spinal cord 
injury, or donor program, should also be included in this 
report.
    The Committee is encouraged by the progress made in moving 
to a capitated system to allocate resources. Capitation 
represents a far more equitable method of allocating resources 
than VA traditionally has employed, and should ensure that 
cost-effective management practices are rewarded. In developing 
capitated rates, the Committee supports the recommendation of 
the veterans service organizations' independent budget to 
reflect in the rates the additional costs of special services 
infrastructure and staffing. As the Department works to 
establish capitation rates for the fiscal year 1998 budget, the 
Committee wishes to be kept informed of progress in this area.
    The Committee also is supportive of the development of 
performance measures for VISN and medical center 
administrators, to ensure appropriate incentives for the 
provision of high quality, cost-effective care. The General 
Accounting Office recently stated, ``Unlike private care 
providers, VA bears few of the risks associated with 
inefficient practices and, as such, has little economic 
incentive to reduce costs.'' Performance measures should help 
rectify this systemic disincentive. VA is to keep the Committee 
apprised of progress in the implementation of performance 
measures.
    In Senate Report 104-140, which accompanied the fiscal year 
1996 VA-HUD bill, the Committee noted concerns with VA's 
proposal to create community-based primary care access points. 
In response to those concerns, VHA recently finalized basic 
requirements and criteria for the establishment of such access 
points. These criteria represent an appropriate response to the 
need to enhance veterans' access to community-based outpatient 
services within the confines of a constrained budget. The 
Committee expects VHA will monitor closely the outcomes of 
access points and ensure that they fulfill stated objectives, 
including more cost-effective care, improved quality and 
patient satisfaction, and more equitable access to care 
throughout the system. The Committee wishes to be kept apprised 
of this initiative.
    VA and the Department of Defense recently completed a joint 
report on ways the two Departments can enhance cooperation, 
reduce costs, and improve health care services. The Committee 
strongly supports this initiative, commends both Departments 
for their efforts, and urges the continuation of such joint 
endeavors. Initiatives such as using VA and DOD combined 
purchasing to reduce costs, and increasing sharing of 
laboratory and other services, should be implemented 
expeditiously in an effort to make better use of resources.
    The Committee notes the extraordinary needs of homeless 
veterans in the State of Alaska. These veterans must cope with 
the severe weather, isolation, and long, harsh winters that are 
associated with life in Alaska. The Committee directs the 
Department to provide $400,000 for the homeless veterans 
domiciliary program in Alaska, including the purchase of 
transitional housing units ($300,000) and the expansion of the 
domiciliary's video-conferencing capabilities ($100,000).
    VA is to continue the demonstration project involving the 
Clarksburg VA Medical Center and the Ruby Memorial Hospital at 
West Virginia University.
    The Committee encourages VA to continue the psychology 
internship program at no less than the 1995 level and use these 
health care professionals aggressively in primary care settings 
to counsel behavioral modification to reduce mortality and 
morbidity and the need for hospital services.
    The Committee notes the need for a mobile clinic to be 
operated from the Wilkes-Barre VAMC to serve veterans in rural 
and isolated areas of Pennsylvania, and urges VHA to address 
this need.
    VA is to continue adequately funding the Williamsport 
Veterans Center at no less than the current level of $300,000.
    In view of the importance of increasing rural veterans' 
access to health care services, VA should consider funding 
pilot programs such as the Veterans Rural Access Program [V-
RAP] at the Grand Island VA Medical Center. This program would 
shorten the distance required for many Nebraska veterans to 
receive VA surgical services through such initiatives as 
contractual arrangements with community hospitals.
    The Committee recognizes the importance of outpatient 
clinics in providing access to medical care to veterans in 
rural and outlying areas, and is concerned about the VA's 
commitment to continuing to provide outpatient services in 
Cambridge and Cumberland, MD. In both cases, there are issues 
relating to the current leases for space for VA clinics which 
need to be addressed expeditiously in order to ensure that 
veterans' access to medical care in these locations is 
uninterrupted. The Committee expects the VA to take immediately 
the necessary steps to address the need for acquiring new space 
for these clinics, and to report to the Committee within 90 
days on the plan for continuity of service to veterans in each 
location.
    The Committee is aware that the Lebanon VA Medical Center 
has operated a health screening van since 1988. This vehicle 
allows access to veterans in 12 counties to health screening 
and referrals for follow-up care. While the program has been 
very successful in an area with a large rural population, the 
van presently is in need of replacement due to age and use. VA 
should give appropriate consideration to providing necessary 
resources for this purpose.
    The Committee is aware of ongoing efforts by the Kansas 
Historical Society, the National Trust for Historic 
Preservation, and concerned local citizens to save the 
historically significant Ward Building at the Leavenworth VA 
Medical Center from demolition. It is expected that the 
Department will refrain from demolishing this historic 
Victorian-style structure, built in 1888, to allow additional 
time to identify private funds for its restoration.
    The Committee concurs with the House in requesting the 
Department to conduct a feasibility study of establishing a 
health care facility in Alamogordo, NM. Currently, veterans 
living in southwest New Mexico travel 150 miles round trip to 
seek care at a VA outpatient clinic.
    The Committee recognizes the unique national resource in 
neuroimaging at the Albuquerque VA Medical Center. The 
Institute of Neuroimaging utilizes medical imaging technologies 
to provide a live picture of the human brain at work, which 
greatly enhances the ability to diagnose and treat complex and 
debilitating illnesses. The demand for neuroimaging services 
exceeds current staffing levels. The Committee expects the VA 
to acknowledge the importance of this national resource, and 
urges VA to provide the additional staff it requires to provide 
these services.
    The Committee is concerned that the most advanced prostate 
cancer treatment be made available to veterans being treated in 
VA medical facilities. The Committee directs the Secretary to 
convene a study on prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment in 
the VA, in cooperation with the Center for Prostate Disease 
Research and in coordination with the Department of Defense 
which is conducting a similar study. The study should review 
current diagnostic and treatment options, and recommend 
Department-wide clinical practice guidelines for available 
treatment options. The study should include a plan to ensure 
that the highest quality care for prostate cancer is made 
available to all beneficiaries, and to provide regular 
physician education on prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment, 
and routine updates on therapeutic advances. VA is to report to 
the Committee not later than June 30, 1997, on the findings and 
recommendations of the study.
    The Committee notes that current regulations under title 38 
require VA officials to report to State licensing boards any 
separated licensed health care professional who resigned after 
having had his clinical privileges restricted or revoked, or 
who resigned after serious concerns about his clinical 
competence were raised but not resolved. VA should, wherever 
appropriate and available, use statistical analyses as a factor 
in determining an employee's clinical competence. Such 
information should be considered when determining whether to 
report a nurse to a State's board of nursing. In the absence of 
stricter Federal guidelines, VA should adhere to State law 
relating to the reporting of licensed health care professionals 
to the appropriate health care licensing board when questions 
about competence have been raised.
    Bill language is included, as in the past, delaying the 
availability of $596,000,000 in the equipment and land and 
structures object classifications. This is an increase of 
$26,000,000 over the House amount and the administration 
request level, and a decrease of $193,000,000 below the enacted 
level.

                    medical and prosthetic research

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $257,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     257,000,000
House allowance.........................................     277,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                             262,000,000

                          program description

    The ``Medical and prosthetic research'' account provides 
funds for medical, rehabilitative, and health services 
research. Medical research supports basic and clinical studies 
that advance knowledge leading to improvements in the 
prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases and 
disabilities. Rehabilitation research focuses on rehabilitation 
engineering problems in the fields of prosthetics, orthotics, 
adaptive equipment for vehicles, sensory aids and related 
areas. Health services research focuses on improving the 
effectiveness and economy of delivery of health services.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $262,000,000 for medical and 
prosthetic research. This is an increase of $5,000,000 over the 
current budget and the budget request.
    The Committee has recommended an increase for this program 
in view of its importance in recruiting and retaining highly 
qualified medical professionals in the VA system; the high 
priority of improving the diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, 
and prevention of diseases and disabilities, especially those 
with high prevalence among veterans; and the mounting backlog 
of approved, but unfunded projects.
    The Committee continues to support VA's health services 
research program and urges the Department to continue its 
funding at no less than current levels. As VA continues the 
transition to managed care, this research program becomes 
increasingly important.
    Recognizing the large number of veterans who suffer from 
prostate cancer, the Committee encourages VA to consider 
increasing the amount of prostate cancer research selected 
through the normal merit review process.
    In view of the link between neurofibromatosis [NF] and 
common human cancers, VA should consider increasing funding for 
NF research, through the normal peer review process, and is 
encouraged to collaborate with other relevant Federal entities 
on future NF research projects.

      medical administration and miscellaneous operating expenses

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $63,602,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      62,207,000
House allowance.........................................      59,207,000
Committee recommendation................................      62,207,000

                          program description

    This appropriation provides funds for central office 
executive direction (Under Secretary for Health and staff), 
administration and supervision of all VA medical and 
construction programs, including development and implementation 
of policies, plans, and program objectives.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $62,207,000 for medical 
administration and miscellaneous operating expenses, the same 
as the budget request, $1,395,000 below the current budget, and 
$3,000,000 above the House amount. The Committee supports VHA's 
leadership in aggressively implementing the VISN reorganization 
and improvements to the VA medical system.

                   transitional housing loan program

                     (including transfer of funds)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996....................          $7,000         $54,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................           7,000          54,000
House allowance.........................           7,000          54,000
Committee recommendation................           7,000          54,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    This account provides for the cost of direct loans and the 
associated administrative expenses, for the transitional 
housing loan program to nonprofit organizations.
    VA is authorized under Public Law 102-54 to make 
transitional housing loans to nonprofit organizations 
exclusively for use as transitional group residences for 
veterans who are in a program for the treatment of substance 
abuse. The amount of a loan cannot exceed $4,500 for any single 
residential unit and each loan must be repaid within 2 years 
through monthly installments.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $7,000 for 
the estimated cost of providing loans for this program, 
associated administrative expenses of $54,000 which may be 
transferred to the general post fund, and a limitation on 
direct loans of $70,000.

                      Departmental Administration

                       general operating expenses

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $848,143,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     843,730,000
House allowance.........................................     840,584,000
Committee recommendation................................     813,730,000

                          program description

    This appropriation provides for the administration of 
nonmedical veterans benefits through the Veterans Benefits 
Administration [VBA], the executive direction of the 
Department, several top level supporting offices, of the Board 
of Contract Appeals, and the Board of Veterans Appeals.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $813,730,000 for general operating 
expenses, a reduction of $26,854,000 below the House amount, 
$34,413,000 below the current budget and $30,000,000 below the 
budget request.
    The Committee has made the following changes from the 
budget request:

Deferred relocation expenses............................    -$10,000,000
Travel costs............................................      -6,000,000
Restructuring plans which will not be implemented.......      -6,000,000
Information technology such as software development 
    activities..........................................      -2,000,000
Cash awards and bonuses.................................      -2,000,000
Increase requested for the Board of Veterans Appeals....      -4,000,000

    The Committee notes the number of original compensation and 
pension claims is declining in concert with decreases in the 
military separation rate. This accounts in part for the 
decrease in the administration's requested budget for 
compensation and pension staffing. As a result of the decline 
in new claims, it is anticipated that the claims backlog will 
be reduced to approximately 277,000 pending claims by the end 
of fiscal year 1997, and the timeliness of claims processing 
will improve.
    The reduction in the number of pending claims does not, 
however, reflect improvements within the Veterans Benefits 
Administration. Indeed, the Committee is very concerned with 
the management of VBA and its failure comprehensively to 
address fundamental, systemic shortcomings in service delivery 
to veterans. Last fall, VBA announced plans to restructure 
several field offices. While there is little question that the 
VBA needs restructuring, a reorganization must involve more 
than cost-cutting measures. It must be based on a long-term 
strategic plan addressing VBA's myriad problems, including the 
bureaucratic organizational structure, antiquated businesses 
processes, inadequate automation, the effects of judicial 
review, and the relationship of VBA to the Veterans Health 
Administration and the Board of Veterans Appeals. VBA's 
proposal failed to meet such basic requirements and has yet to 
complete a strategic plan.
    While VA recently announced it will not proceed with plans 
to move compensation and pension processing services out of 
offices in Anchorage, Honolulu, Fort Harrison, and Wilmington, 
the Committee remains very troubled with the manner in which 
the proposed restructuring was handled. The Committee expects 
the Department will not proceed with significant restructuring 
activities until it completes a long-term strategic plan and 
comprehensively addresses the systemwide weaknesses.
    The Veterans' Claims Adjudication Commission, authorized in 
Public Law 103-446 to examine VA's system for adjudicating 
veterans' claims and appeals for service-connected disability 
compensation, recently issued their preliminary conclusions. 
The Commission identified significant shortcomings, concluding, 
``VA faces fundamental organizational and philosophical 
difficulties that would present a significant challenge even 
during times of readily available resources.'' The Committee 
concurs with this assessment.
    The Committee also concurs with the following testimony 
presented by a representative of the Disabled American Veterans 
before a House Veterans Affairs Subcommittee earlier this year:

          VA must be held accountable for its continuing 
        failure to take decisive and meaningful actions to 
        improve decisionmaking and claims processing at the 
        regional office level. And if VA officials are to make 
        real changes, there must be accountability through each 
        level of the system that flows down to the adjudicator. 
        C&P; service management must set the proper example for 
        adjudicators; must instill in them the proper attitudes 
        and sense of fidelity to the law; must properly train 
        them; must oversee them, review their performance, and 
        follow up on training; and hold them accountable for 
        their work products.

    The Committee agrees with the recommendations of the 
veterans service organizations' independent budget that VBA 
should establish performance criteria, which include measures 
of technical proficiency, timeliness, and work quality, for 
regional office adjudicators. It is expected that such 
performance criteria will be included in VBA's long-awaited 
strategic plan. VBA is to report on its progress in meeting 
these recommendations within 60 days of enactment of this act.
    The Committee remains concerned with VBA's ADP technology 
modernization initiative. While approximately $300,000,000 has 
been expended to date, VBA has not been able to demonstrate any 
quantifiable benefits in terms of improved service to veterans. 
Modernization efforts have proceeded prior to the development 
of a strategic plan for VBA or the implementation of business 
process reengineering. VBA has procured hardware and software 
before assessing the benefits or identifying the technology 
needs. Further, according to GAO, investments being made in 
software development may not achieve the desired results. The 
mishandling of this resource-intensive initiative demonstrates 
the very significant management problems within VBA.
    The National Academy of Public Administration currently is 
conducting a review of VBA, at this Committee's direction, 
which should provide specific recommendations for 
comprehensive, strategic improvements to the organization and 
the many problems which have been identified. VBA should 
cooperate fully with NAPA as it performs this analysis. It is 
expected that NAPA will build upon the Adjudication 
Commission's significant work to date.
    The Committee notes that the Adjudication Commission, in 
its preliminary findings, found ``the basic purpose of the 
Board of Veterans Appeals came into question with the advent of 
judicial review. In its present role, BVA does not appear to be 
an effective vehicle for the fair, impartial, and timely 
processing of appeals. Given the availability of the Court of 
Veterans Appeals to review the Board's final decisions, the 
Board's current form of de novo review of regional office 
decisions may no longer be necessary or in veterans' best 
interests.'' The Committee agrees that the role of the Board 
needs to be reassessed. It is expected that the National 
Academy of Public Administration review will address this 
issue.
    While long overdue, the Committee supports VBA's efforts in 
business process reengineering. Such efforts should be, to the 
extent possible, protected from budget reductions and should be 
implemented expeditiously.
    The Committee supports VBA's plans to improve telephone 
service to veterans which will greatly reduce the blocked call 
rate. Currently, VBA experiences an unacceptably high telephone 
call blockage rate in excess of 50 percent.
    As in the House, the Committee has retained bill language 
limiting the number of noncareer senior executive service and 
schedule C positions in 1997 to 6 and 11, respectively. Bill 
language is included, as in the House, authorizing the 
expenditure of funds to administer the Service Members 
Occupational Conversion and Training Act.

                        national cemetery system

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $72,604,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      76,864,000
House allowance.........................................      76,864,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              76,864,000

                          program description

    The National Cemetery System was established in accordance 
with the National Cemeteries Act of 1973. It has a fourfold 
mission: to provide for the interment in any national cemetery 
the remains of eligible deceased servicepersons and discharged 
veterans, together with their spouses and certain dependents, 
and to permanently maintain their graves; to mark graves of 
eligible persons in national and private cemeteries; to 
administer the grant program for aid to States in establishing, 
expanding, or improving State veterans' cemeteries; and to 
administer the Presidential Memorial Certificate Program.
    There are a total of 147 cemeterial installations in 39 
States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The 
Committee's recommendation for the National Cemetery System 
provides funds for all of these cemeterial installations, 
including the Tahoma National Military Cemetery, which would be 
the first of its kind for Washington State veterans.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $76,864,000 
for the National Cemetery System, as provided by the House. 
This is an increase of $4,260,000 over the enacted level.

                    office of the inspector general

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $30,900,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      31,175,000
House allowance.........................................      30,900,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              30,900,000

                          program description

    The Office of Inspector General was established by the 
Inspector General Act of 1978 and is responsible for the audit 
and investigation and inspections of all Department of Veterans 
Affairs programs and operations.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $30,900,000 for the inspector 
general, as in the House. This is a decrease of $275,000 below 
the request and the same as the current budget.

                      construction, major projects

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $136,155,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     249,900,000
House allowance.........................................     245,358,000

Committee recommendation

                                                             178,250,000

                          program description

    The construction, major projects appropriation provides for 
constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of the 
facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of VA, 
including planning, architectural and engineering services, and 
site acquisition where the estimated cost of a project is 
$3,000,000 or more.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $178,250,000 
for construction, major projects. The Committee has made the 
following changes to the budget request:

Brevard County, FL, new medical center..................    -$42,600,000
Travis, CA new medical center...........................     -32,100,000
Marion, IN, renovation..................................     -17,300,000
Pittsburgh, PA, renovation..............................     -17,400,000
Salisbury, NC, renovation...............................     -18,200,000
Advance planning fund...................................      -1,258,000
Leavenworth, KS, consolidated ambulatory care facility..     +26,950,000
Albany, NY, cemetery....................................     +13,000,000
Portland, OR, research addition.........................     +16,000,000
Guilford Township, OH, cemetery.........................      +1,258,000

    In view of the recent implementation of the veterans 
integrated service networks [VISN's] and the structural changes 
which are anticipated to occur as a result of this 
reorganization, the Committee recommends a limited major 
construction appropriation for the medical program. The VISN 
reorganization will have significant implications for VA's 
infrastructure requirements. Significant renovation projects, 
therefore, should not go forward at this time.
    The Committee also continues to disapprove of the 
construction of new VA hospitals. Such construction cannot be 
justified in an era of declining resources and in view of the 
increasing shift away from hospital-based services.
    The Committee is concerned the Department has refused to 
proceed with the construction of outpatient clinics in Brevard 
County, FL and Travis, CA, as provided for in fiscal year 1996 
authorization and appropriation legislation. The Department is 
directed to proceed expeditiously with these projects to ensure 
that VA health care services can be provided to veterans in 
those areas as soon as possible.
    The Committee has recommended funding for three outpatient 
projects, including Honolulu, HI, and Wilkes-Barre, PA, as 
requested by the administration, and Leavenworth, KS. Given the 
importance of enhancing outpatient care services and the 
compelling need for these facilities, the Committee believes 
these projects are justified fully.
    The Committee notes the Honolulu ambulatory care project is 
a joint venture with the Tripler Army Medical Center which will 
effect cost efficiencies through consolidated functions, 
service exchange and cost reimbursement.
    The Wilkes-Barre outpatient addition will correct serious 
space, functional and safety deficiencies which now exist. The 
ambulatory care program currently is operating in 44 percent of 
the space required to meet current workload. According to the 
Department, it is anticipated that this medical center's role 
will not only continue under the VISN, but increase because of 
the realignment.
    The Leavenworth ambulatory care addition is required to 
correct critical space, functional, and safety deficiencies. 
This project is to be expedited through a design-build 
contract.
    The Committee's recommendations are as follows:

                                          CONSTRUCTION, MAJOR PROJECTS                                          
                                            [In thousands of dollars]                                           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Available                                             
                Location and description                   through     1997 budget      House        Committee  
                                                             1996        request      allowance   recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medical Program:                                                                                                
    Replacement and modernization:                                                                              
        Brevard County, FL, new medical center/nursing                                                          
         home..........................................       25,000       42,600   ............  ..............
        Travis, CA, replacement medical center.........       47,600       32,100        32,100   ..............
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
            Subtotal...................................       72,600       74,700        32,100   ..............
                                                        ========================================================
    Outpatient improvements:                                                                                    
        Honolulu, HI ambulatory care/renovate ``E''                                                             
         wing..........................................       27,000       16,000        16,000         16,000  
        Leavenworth, KS, ambulatory care...............        2,500  ............  ............        26,950  
        Lyons, NJ, ambulatory care.....................  ...........  ............        1,000   ..............
        Murfreesboro, TN, renovate/reconstruction                                                               
         psychiatric care design.......................  ...........  ............        2,300   ..............
        Wilkes-Barre, PA, ambulatory care addition/                                                             
         environmental improvements....................        5,000       42,700        42,700         42,700  
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
            Subtotal...................................       34,500       58,700        62,000         85,650  
                                                        ========================================================
    Relocation: Mountain Home, TN, renovation and                                                               
     relocate medical school...........................  ...........  ............       15,500   ..............
                                                        ========================================================
    Patient environment:                                                                                        
        Marion, IN, replace psychiatric beds...........  ...........       17,300        17,300   ..............
        Tampa, FL, SCI/energy plant first phase........  ...........  ............       20,000   ..............
        Pittsburgh (UD), PA, environmental improvements  ...........       17,400        17,400   ..............
        Salisbury, NC, environmental enhancements......  ...........       18,200        18,200   ..............
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
            Subtotal...................................  ...........       52,900        72,900   ..............
                                                        ========================================================
    Research: Portland, OR, research addition..........       16,000  ............  ............        16,000  
                                                        ========================================================
    Advance planning fund: Various stations............  ...........        8,845         3,845          8,845  
    Design fund: Various stations......................  ...........        1,000         1,000          1,000  
    Hazardous substance abatement: Various stations....  ...........          800           800            800  
    Asbestos abatement: Various stations...............  ...........       15,000        10,000         13,742  
    Less: Fiscal year 1996 design fund.................  ...........       (2,645)       (2,645)        (2,645) 
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.........................................      123,100      209,300       195,500        123,392  
                                                        ========================================================
National Cemetery Program:                                                                                      
    Various stations: Design fund......................  ...........          500           500            500  
    Guilford Township, OH, design......................  ...........  ............        1,258          1,258  
    Chicago, IL, new cemetery..........................        1,500       18,400        18,400         18,400  
    Albany, NY, new cemetery...........................  ...........  ............       13,000         13,000  
    Dallas/Fort Worth, TX, new cemetery................        5,000       16,200        16,200         16,200  
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.........................................        6,500       35,100        49,358         49,358  
                                                        ========================================================
Judgment fund: Various stations........................  ...........        5,000   ............         5,000  
                                                        ========================================================
Claims analyses: Various stations......................  ...........          500           500            500  
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total construction, major projects...............      129,600      249,900       245,358        178,250  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      CONSTRUCTION, MINOR PROJECTS

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $190,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     189,241,000
House allowance.........................................     160,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     190,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The construction, minor projects appropriation provides for 
constructing, altering, extending, and improving any of the 
facilities under the jurisdiction or for the use of VA, 
including planning, architectural and engineering services, and 
site acquisition, where the estimated cost of a project is less 
than $3,000,000.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $190,000,000, the same as the 
current budget, an increase of $30,000,000 above the House 
amount, and $759,000 above the budget request. This 
appropriation will provide for approximately 115 construction 
awards and 80 design awards.
    The administration's budget proposed an increase in the 
minor construction project cost limitation to $10,000,000. As 
in the House, the Committee has not changed the current 
limitation.
    The Committee has not recommended bill language requested 
by the administration authorizing the expenditure of up to 
$3,000,000 in minor construction funding for enhanced use 
projects. The Committee does not believe this authorization is 
justifiable at this time.

                         parking revolving fund

Appropriations, 1996....................................................
Budget estimate, 1997...................................................
House allowance.........................................     $12,300,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

                          program description

    The revolving fund provides funds for the construction, 
alteration, and acquisition (by purchase or lease) of parking 
garages at VA medical facilities authorized by 38 U.S.C. 8109.
    The Secretary is required under certain circumstances to 
establish and collect fees for the use of such garages and 
parking facilities. Receipts from the parking fees are to be 
deposited in the revolving fund and would be used to fund 
future parking garage initiatives.

                        committee recommendation

    No new budget authority is requested by the administration 
or provided for fiscal year 1997.

       grants for construction of state extended care facilities

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $47,397,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      39,909,000
House allowance.........................................      47,397,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              47,397,000

                          program description

    This account is used to provide grants to assist States in 
acquiring or constructing State home facilities for furnishing 
domiciliary or nursing home care to veterans, and to expand, 
remodel or alter existing buildings for furnishing domiciliary, 
nursing home, or hospital care to veterans in State homes. The 
grant may not exceed 65 percent of the total cost of the 
project, and grants to any one State may not exceed one-third 
of the amount appropriated in any fiscal year.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $47,397,000 for grants for the 
construction of State extended care facilities. The amount 
provided is the same as the House amount and the current 
budget, and represents an increase of $7,488,000 above the 
budget request. The Committee recognizes that this program is a 
cost-effective means of meeting the long-term health care needs 
of veterans.

       grants for the construction of state veterans' cemeteries

Appropriations, 1996....................................      $1,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................       1,000,000
House allowance.........................................       1,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               1,000,000

                          program description

    Public Law 95-476, as codified in title 38 U.S.C. 2408, 
established authority to provide aid to States for 
establishment, expansion, and improvement of State veterans' 
cemeteries which are operated and permanently maintained by the 
States. A grant may not exceed 50 percent of the total value of 
the land and the cost of improvements.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for grants for 
construction of State veterans' cemeteries in fiscal year 1997, 
as requested by the administration and provided by the House.

                             Franchise Fund

    The Committee recommends bill language, as in the House, 
authorizing the establishment of a franchise fund. The VA was 
chosen as a pilot franchise fund agency under Public Law 103-
356, the Government Management and Reform Act of 1994. The 
franchise fund will be financed on a fee-for-service basis 
rather than through the general operating expenses 
appropriation. This revolving fund will be used to supply 
common administrative services on the basis of services 
supplied, with billings of about $50,000,000 in fiscal year 
1997.
    The Committee expects to be kept apprised of VA's 
activities in this area, including quarterly status reports.

                       administrative provisions

    The Committee has included seven administrative provisions 
carried in earlier bills. Included is a provision enabling VA 
to use surplus earnings from the national service life 
insurance, U.S. Government life insurance, and veterans special 
life insurance programs to administer these programs. This 
provision was included for the first time in fiscal year 1996 
appropriations legislation. The Department estimates that 
$32,000,000 will be reimbursed to the ``General operating 
expenses'' account as a result of this provision.
         TITLE II--DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 1996.................................... $19,127,122,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................  21,963,813,000
House allowance.........................................  19,867,152,000
Committee recommendation................................  19,664,845,000

                          general description

    The Department of Housing and Urban Development [HUD] was 
established by the Housing and Urban Development Act (Public 
Law 89-174), effective November 9, 1965. This Department is the 
principal Federal agency responsible for programs concerned 
with the Nation's housing needs, fair housing opportunities, 
and improving and developing the Nation's communities.
    In carrying out the mission of serving the needs and 
interests of the Nation's communities and of the people who 
live and work in them, HUD administers mortgage and loan 
insurance programs that help families become homeowners and 
facilitate the construction of rental housing; rental and 
homeownership subsidy programs for low-income families who 
otherwise could not afford decent housing; programs to combat 
discrimination in housing and affirmatively further fair 
housing opportunity; programs aimed at insuring an adequate 
supply of mortgage credit; and programs that aid neighborhood 
rehabilitation and the preservation of our urban centers from 
blight and decay.
    HUD administers programs to protect the homebuyer in the 
marketplace and fosters programs and research that stimulate 
and guide the housing industry to provide not only housing, but 
a suitable living environment.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$19,664,845,000 for the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development. This is an increase of $537,723,000 above the 1996 
enacted level, $2,298,968,000 below the budget estimate, and 
$202,307,000 below the House allowance.
    This bill represents the third major iteration undertaken 
by this Congress of comprehensive restructuring of the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development and reform of 
programs under its jurisdiction. The first measure was enacted 
by this Congress 1 year ago as part of the Disaster Emergency 
Supplemental and Rescission Act of 1995, Public Law 104-19. It 
was that measure which made sweeping changes in housing policy 
and program levels, including the rescission of $6,400,000,000 
from previously appropriated incremental housing commitments 
and additional subsidized housing authorizations.
    During consideration of that measure, this Committee 
established its policy goals to transform ongoing Federal 
housing programs. Central to the Committee's program is the 
critical task of reversing the ever-increasing cost of Federal 
housing subsidy commitments, which cannot be sustained if the 
Federal budget is to be brought into balance. Related to this 
fundamental budgetary goal are the programmatic needs of 
reducing the concentration of welfare-dependent families in 
subsidized and public housing developments, and reorienting 
these programs to assist families in working toward financial 
independence.
    Recognizing the enormous scope of these changes, the 
Committee proposed a multifaceted strategy of legislative 
reform. This included deregulation of costly, complex, 
confusing, and counterproductive Federal mandates. Instead, the 
Committee insisted on delegation of responsibility to States 
and local units of government which are best positioned to 
target resources toward priority local needs and to curb 
potential abuse. Finally, the Committee implemented a 
comprehensive policy of eliminating unsustainable program 
commitments, first with the rescissions enacted in July of last 
year, and with the redirection of funding priorities in the 
appropriations act for fiscal year 1996 and in this measure for 
fiscal year 1997.
    The sweeping reforms of the Disaster Emergency Supplemental 
and Rescission Act were finally enacted into law after an 
initial veto, in part prompted by objections of the President 
over the scope and magnitude of the changes proposed by the 
Congress in housing and community development programs. 
Similarly, the President also vetoed H.R. 2099--the VA, HUD, 
and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 
1996--in December 1995, again, partially based on objections to 
reforms proposed for HUD. Ultimately these changes were 
accepted by the President as part of the Balanced Budget 
Downpayment Act, I and the Omnibus Consolidated Rescission and 
Appropriations Act. Since Congress still has under 
consideration authorization legislation to reform HUD housing 
programs, this measure contains extensions of the reform 
legislation enacted in the appropriations bill over 1 year ago.
    One significant change proposed in this act is a change to 
the basic appropriations structure for the Department. The 
Committee proposes elimination of the antiquated ``Annual 
contributions for assisted housing'' account which was a 
catchall for a large number of different categorical programs. 
Many of these activities have been eliminated, including public 
housing development and incremental certificates and vouchers, 
while others have been merged into flexible grants. Instead, 
this act categorizes Federal housing programs into three 
primary accounts. The first includes the remaining housing 
construction programs: housing for the elderly under section 
202; housing for the disabled under section 811; and public 
housing for Indian families.
    The other two primary housing accounts are for prevention 
of displacement of low-income families, and for preservation of 
privately owned subsidized housing and to maintain public 
housing developments. It is the Committee's view that this new 
account structure will permit the Congress to make more 
informed judgments as to the allocation of scarce budgetary 
resources for low-income housing assistance. For example, 
despite the elimination of all other direct housing production 
activities, the Committee's deep support of housing for the 
elderly and the disabled is reflected in the appropriation for 
development of additional housing of this type. Similarly, 
another limited exception to the policy of eliminating 
expensive new housing construction is the appropriation for 
housing on Indian reservations which constitutes a unique and 
especially compelling need.
    This account structure also makes clear the priority for 
avoidance of involuntary displacement of currently assisted 
families due to the growing constraints on discretionary 
Federal expenditures, and for protecting the massive previous 
investment in public housing, estimated at $90,000,000,000, and 
the comparable Federal financial commitment in various forms of 
assisted private housing developments. Since foreseeable 
budgetary trends preclude similar investment in the future, it 
is critical that this stock be protected and maintained in the 
best condition possible for use by needy families.
    The following accounts are proposed for elimination:

               Annual Contributions for Assisted Housing

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $9,818,795,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   5,597,000,000
House allowance.........................................   5,132,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

                          Program Description

    The ``Annual contributions for assisted housing'' account 
has been the principal appropriation for the Department for 
providing housing assistance to low-income families. For fiscal 
year 1997, the House-passed bill provided funding only for 
renewals of expiring section 8 contracts and for contract 
amendments.
    The Committee is recommending funding of these activities 
under the new account head: ``Prevention of resident 
displacement.''

         Housing for Special Populations: Elderly and Disabled

Appropriations, 1996....................................................
Budget estimate, 1997...................................    $769,000,000
House allowance.........................................     909,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

                          Program Description

    The ``Housing for special populations'' account is a new 
account intended to provide funding for development of housing 
for the elderly under section 202 and the disabled under 
section 811. The Committee is proposing continuing these 
activities under the new account head: ``Development of 
additional new subsidized housing.''

                       Public and Indian Housing

                       Housing Certificates Fund

Appropriations, 1996....................................................
Budget estimate, 1997...................................    $290,000,000
House allowance.........................................     166,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

                          Program Description

    The housing certificates fund is a new account proposed by 
the House to consolidate funding for the existing section 8 
voucher and certificate program. These activities are proposed 
for inclusion in the account under the head: ``Prevention of 
resident displacement.''

               Public and Indian Housing Operation Funds

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $2,800,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   2,900,000,000
House allowance.........................................   2,850,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

                          Program Description

    This account provides funding for the payment of operating 
subsidies to public housing authorities and to Indian housing 
authorities to augment rent payments by residents in order to 
provide sufficient revenue to meet reasonable operating costs 
as calculated by the performance funding system. The Committee 
is recommending funding this activity under the head: 
``Preserving existing housing investment.''

                Public and Indian Housing Capital Funds

Appropriations, 1996....................................................
Budget estimate, 1997...................................  $2,700,000,000
House allowance.........................................   2,700,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

                          Program Description

    This new account has been proposed by the House to provide 
funding for public and Indian housing modernization capital 
requirements. Also included in this account is funding for 
supportive service activities as well as technical assistance. 
The Committee recommends providing for the capital improvements 
needs of public and Indian housing under the account head: 
``Preserving existing housing investment.'' Supportive services 
for public housing is continued as an earmark under the 
Community Development Block Grants Program in the manner 
provided for in fiscal year 1996.

    Revitalization of Severely Distressed Public Housing [HOPE VII]

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $480,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     650,000,000
House allowance.........................................     550,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

                          Program Description

    The ``Revitalization of severely distressed public 
housing'' account is intended to make awards to public housing 
authorities on a competitive basis to demolish obsolete failed 
developments or to revitalize, where appropriate, sites upon 
which these developments exist. This is a focused effort to 
eliminate public housing which was, in many cases, poorly 
located, ill-designed, and not well constructed. Such 
unsuitable housing has been very expensive to operate, and not 
possible to manage in a reasonable manner due to multiple 
deficiencies. The Committee proposes funding for this high-
priority purpose under the head: ``Preserving existing housing 
investment.''

             Drug Elimination Grants for Low-Income Housing

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $290,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     290,000,000
House allowance.........................................     290,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

                          Program Description

    Drug elimination grants are provided to public and Indian 
housing agencies to combat drug-related crime in and around 
public housing developments. The Committee recommends inclusion 
of this activity in the appropriation under the head: 
``Preserving existing housing investment.''
    The previous accounts have been replaced by the following 
three new accounts as described previously in the report:

            Development of Additional New Subsidized Housing

Appropriations, 1996....................................................
Budget estimate, 1997...................................................
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                                            $969,000,000

                          Program Description

    This account comprises all remaining new subsidized housing 
construction programs of the Department: housing for the 
elderly under section 202; housing for the disabled under 
section 811; and public housing for Indian families. Under 
these programs the Department provides capital grants to 
eligible entities for the acquisition, rehabilitation, or 
construction of housing. Twenty-five percent of the funding 
provided for housing for the disabled is available for tenant-
based assistance under section 8.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $969,000,000 
for development of additional new subsidized housing. Included 
in this recommendation is $595,000,000 for capital advances for 
housing for the elderly, $174,000,000 for capital advances for 
housing for the disabled, and $200,000,000 for development or 
acquisition of public housing for Indian families. These 
amounts will maintain the current fiscal year 1996 levels of 
subsidized housing production for these three programs.
    HUD formerly financed a number of low-income housing 
production programs as a strategy to address shelter needs in 
the Nation. These programs included public housing construction 
and development of new multifamily housing under long-term 
subsidy contracts under section 8. The high cost of such new 
housing construction and the long-term financial commitment for 
annual operating subsidies made such continued expansion of the 
federally supported housing inventory impossible in light of 
constraints on the discretionary budget. The Committee's 
recommendation maintains funding for only the highest priority 
populations for such expensive housing assistance.
    A serious concern has been brought to the Committee's 
attention with respect to the recapture of funds previously 
allocated to the Cheyenne River Indian Tribe for the 
development of 30 housing units. The Committee appreciates the 
competitive policies governing the award of such funds and the 
requirement that recipient agencies utilize such funds in a 
prompt manner. Nonetheless, the Committee is very concerned 
over the potential loss of such urgently needed housing on this 
reservation and urges the Department to reexamine this 
circumstance.

                  Prevention of Resident Displacement

Appropriations, 1996....................................................
Budget estimate, 1997...................................................
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                                          $4,775,000,000

                          Program Description

    This account seeks to avoid the disruptive and painful 
effects of displacement that families may confront from loss of 
existing subsidized housing. The largest component of this 
account are amounts to extend expiring rental subsidy 
contracts. For fiscal year 1997, such contract extensions are 
proposed for 1 year in duration, as contracted from prior 
contract terms which extended several years. In addition to 
amounts necessary to maintain existing rental subsidy 
contracts, amounts are provided for contract amendments which 
arise when a prior-year rental subsidy contract is in danger of 
depleting all funds previously committed and available. In such 
cases, contract amendments are necessary to finance the 
contract through the remaining term of the contract. This 
account also includes funds for new section 8 certificates and 
vouchers to assist residents that are facing potential 
displacement due to the prepayment of subsidized mortgages 
under sections 236 and 221(d)(3) of the National Housing Act or 
because of demolition and redevelopment activities of public 
housing agencies under HOPE VII.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,775,000,000 
for prevention of resident displacement. Included in this 
recommendation is $3,800,000,000 for expiring or terminating 
section 8 subsidy contracts and $800,000,000 for amendments to 
section 8 contracts. The Committee recommendation also includes 
a total of $175,000,000 for relocation of residents in public 
housing losing continuing Federal rental subsidies because of 
expiring project-based contracts or foreclosure, and for a new 
demonstration program linking housing assistance to State 
welfare reform initiatives to help families make the transition 
from welfare to work.

                 Preserving Existing Housing Investment

Appropriations, 1996....................................................
Budget estimate, 1997...................................................
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                                          $6,590,000,000

                          Program Description

    This account includes funding for the payment of operating 
subsidies for public housing and for Indian housing; the 
capital cost of modernization of such housing; demolition of 
obsolete public housing and revitalization of such housing; 
housing preservation activities under the LIHPRHA program; and 
for public housing drug elimination activities.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $6,590,000,000 
for preserving existing housing investment. Included in this 
appropriation is $2,900,000,000 for public housing operation 
subsidies, the same level proposed by the administration, and 
$50,000,000 more than the House allowance. The recommendation 
also includes $2,500,000,000 for modernization of existing 
public housing developments, and $550,000,000 for the 
demolition and revitalization of obsolete public housing. 
Finally, this account includes $350,000,000 for low-income 
housing preservation activities authorized under the LIHPRHA 
program, but as amended in this act to require the use of 
capital grants and loans, and to target limited funding to the 
highest priority projects. This appropriation, together with an 
estimated $150,000,000 of funds recaptured from interest 
subsidy contracts, will provide a program total of 
$500,000,000.
    Last year Congress appropriated $624,000,000 to preserve 
low-income multifamily housing originally developed under 
section 236 or section 221(d)(3), which are eligible for 
prepayment of their original Government-sponsored and 
subsidized mortgage. Such prepayment terminates rent and use 
restrictions and would lead to likely displacement of low-
income residents.
    The fiscal year 1996 appropriations act included a number 
of reforms of this preservation program [LIHPRHA] and allowed 
for the use of a capital grant to financing sales of these 
projects to nonprofits and resident affiliated groups. Priority 
was given to such sales over refinancing requests from owners 
that wished to extend the low-income use restrictions.
    The program has proven to be very popular. It is 
anticipated that by August 15, when refinancing will become 
eligible for funding, sales will consume the entire 
appropriation. The administration has not requested funding for 
this program for the past 2 years. The House did not recommend 
an appropriation for fiscal year 1997. If no additional funds 
are provided, a high rate of prepayments is expected with 
potential displacement of low-income residents that cannot 
afford higher rent or who live in tight rental markets.
    The Committee recommends continuation of the preservation 
program with a new appropriation of $500,000,000. In addition, 
the Committee recommends a change to the preservation program 
which limits assistance to capital grants, for purchases by 
nonprofit groups, and capital loans for refinancing by current 
owners to avoid additional section 8 dependence. Legislation to 
narrow program costs to eliminate high cost projects, and 
prioritize remaining funding for special populations such as 
the elderly also is recommended.
    The Committee is aware of and supports the memorandum of 
understanding [MOU] that was recently entered into between the 
Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Housing 
Authority of New Orleans, and Tulane University, as part of a 
recovery effort for the troubled housing authority. The 
Committee is not opposed to the agreement to fund this 
initiative, subject to the availability of appropriations. The 
Committee also recognizes the role of Tulane's campus 
affiliates program in developing self-sufficiency opportunities 
for residents to complement the recovery effort.

             indian housing loan guarantee program account

                      (limitation on direct loans)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Program     Limitation on
                                               account     direct loans 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996.......................   $3,000,000   ($36,900,000)
Budget estimate, 1997......................    3,000,000    (36,900,000)
House allowance............................    3,000,000    (36,900,000)
Committee recommendation...................    3,000,000    (36,900,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    Section 184 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
1992 authorizes the creation of an Indian Housing Loan 
Guarantee Program. The program would provide a 10-to-1 ratio of 
leverage and seed money to finance new construction of homes on 
Indian reservations. The program would allow Indian families 
who can afford housing to remain on their native land and act 
as positive role models for other families aspiring to 
homeownership.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee has included the budget request of $3,000,000 
in program subsidies to support a loan guarantee level of 
$36,900,000. This is the same as the House allowance.

                   Community Planning and Development

                      community development grants

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $4,600,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   4,600,000,000
House allowance.........................................   4,600,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           4,600,000,000

                          program description

    Under title I of the Housing and Community Development Act 
of 1974, as amended, the Department is authorized to award 
block grants to units of general local government and States 
for the funding of local community development programs. A wide 
range of physical, economic, and social development activities 
are eligible with spending priorities determined at the local 
level, but the law enumerates general objectives which the 
block grants are designed to fulfill, including adequate 
housing, a suitable living environment, and expanded economic 
opportunities, principally for persons of low and moderate 
income. Grant recipients are required to use at least 70 
percent of their block grant funds for activities that benefit 
low- and moderate-income persons.
    Funds are distributed to eligible recipients for community 
development purposes utilizing the higher of two objective 
formulas, one of which gives somewhat greater weight to the age 
of housing stock. Seventy percent of appropriated funds are 
distributed to entitlement communities and 30 percent are 
distributed to nonentitlement communities after deducting 
designated amounts for special purpose grants and Indian 
tribes. Pursuant to the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable 
Housing Act, Indian tribes are eligible to receive 1 percent of 
the total CDBG appropriation, on a competitive basis.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,600,000,000 
for the Community Development Block Grant Program in fiscal 
year 1997. This amount is the same as the 1996 enacted level 
and the House allowance. The House-passed bill proposed 
delaying the availabiity of $300,000,000 of this appropriation 
until the last day of the fiscal year. The Committee recommends 
this delay of funding be stricken.
    The amounts for various activities within the CDBG 
appropriation in fiscal year 1997 are outlined in the following 
table:

                                                               Committee
        Category                                          recommendation

Entitlement cities and counties.........................  $3,032,400,000
Nonentitlement (States and small cities)................   1,299,600,000
Indian tribes...........................................      68,500,000
Special purpose grants (sec. 107).......................      49,000,000
Public housing supportive services......................      50,000,000
Youthbuild Program......................................      40,000,000
Lead-based paint........................................      60,000,000

    The Committee is concerned with recent delays in processing 
section 108 loan guarantees. The Department has engaged Price 
Waterhouse to develop additional collateral requirements to 
further secure section 108 loans. These collateral requirements 
appear evolutionary and are not widely known. Entitlement and 
nonentitlement jurisdictions processing 108 loans have not been 
consulted with on the Price Waterhouse recommendations and have 
no knowledge that these requirements have changed. As a result, 
the section 108 program has endured significant processing 
delays, threatening the viability of projects as interest rates 
have risen.
    The Committee directs HUD to establish a working group of 
practitioners to consider formally the proposed section 108 
collateral requirements, and urges HUD to utilize rulemaking 
procedures with a comment period in implementing any section 
108 collateral requirements.

                  home investment partnerships program

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $1,400,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   1,400,000,000
House allowance.........................................   1,400,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,400,000,000

                          program description

    Title II of the National Affordable Housing Act, as 
amended, authorizes the HOME Investment Partnerships Program. 
This program provides assistance to States, units of local 
government, and Indian tribes for the purpose of expanding the 
supply and affordability of housing. Eligible activities 
include tenant-based rental assistance, acquisition, and 
rehabilitation of affordable rental and ownership housing and, 
also, construction of housing. To participate in the HOME 
Program, State and local governments must develop a 
comprehensive housing affordability strategy [CHAS]. There is a 
matching requirement for participating jurisdictions which can 
be reduced or eliminated if they are experiencing fiscal 
distress.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,400,000,000 
for the HOME Investment Partnership Program. This amount is the 
same level as the 1996 appropriation and the House allowance.

                          homeless assistance

                       HOMELESS ASSISTANCE GRANTS

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $823,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   1,010,000,000
House allowance.........................................     823,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     823,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The proposed Homeless Assistance Grants Program is a 
restructuring of existing McKinney Act programs and would be 
authorized under an amendment to title IV of the McKinney Act. 
The existing programs and requirements would be replaced by a 
comprehensive continuum of care approach to homeless 
assistance. Under the new program, support would be provided to 
States, local governments, nonprofit organizations, and Indian 
tribes. A wide range of activities would be funded which are 
components of an innovative approach to assist homeless persons 
and to prevent future homelessness.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $823,000,000 for homeless 
assistance grants. The amount recommended represents a 
reduction of $187,000,000 from the level of the budget request 
for homeless programs, but is the same amount appropriated for 
fiscal year 1996 and the House allowance.

          Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS [HOPWA]

Appropriations, 1996....................................................
Budget estimate, 1997...................................    $171,000,000
House allowance.........................................     171,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                             171,000,000

                          Program Description

    The Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS [HOPWA] 
Program, previously funded within the ``Annual contributions 
for assisted housing'' account, is designed to provide States 
and localities with resources and incentives to devise long-
term comprehensive strategies for meeting the housing needs of 
persons with HIV/AIDS and their families.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $171,000,000 
for this program. This is the same level enacted into law for 
fiscal year 1996, the administration's budget request, and the 
House allowance.

                     federal housing administration

             fha--mutual mortgage insurance program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Limitation on       Limitation on      Administrative  
                                                         direct loans      guaranteed loans        expenses     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996................................      ($200,000,000)  ($110,000,000,000)        $341,595,000
Budget estimate, 1997...............................       (200,000,000)   (110,000,000,000)         350,595,000
House allowance.....................................       (200,000,000)   (110,000,000,000)         341,595,000
Committee recommendation............................       (200,000,000)   (110,000,000,000)         350,595,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

             fha--general and special risk program account

                     (including transfer of funds)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Limitation on      Limitation on    Administrative                
                                               direct loans     guaranteed loans      expenses     Program costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996......................     ($120,000,000)  ($17,400,000,000)    $202,470,000     $85,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997.....................      (120,000,000)   (17,400,000,000)     207,470,000     160,000,000
House allowance...........................      (120,000,000)   (17,400,000,000)     202,470,000      85,000,000
Committee recommendation..................      (120,000,000)   (17,400,000,000)     207,470,000      85,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    The Federal Housing Administration [FHA] fund covers the 
mortgage and loan insurance activity of about 40 HUD mortgage/
loan insurance programs which are grouped into the mutual 
mortgage insurance [MMI] fund, cooperative management housing 
insurance [CMHI] fund, general insurance fund [GI] fund, and 
the special risk insurance [SRI] fund. For presentation and 
accounting control purposes, these are divided into two sets of 
accounts based on shared characteristics. The unsubsidized 
insurance programs of the mutual mortgage insurance fund and 
the cooperative management housing insurance fund constitute 
one set; and the general risk insurance and special risk 
insurance funds, which are partially composed of subsidized 
programs, make up the other.
    Pursuant to the requirements for direct and guaranteed loan 
programs established in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act 
of 1990 [OBRA], the administration is requesting a direct 
appropriation for administrative expenses in the ``MMI/CMHI 
program'' account of $350,595,000. Amounts to fund this direct 
appropriation are to be derived from offsetting receipts 
transferred to a ``CMHI receipt'' account. For the ``GI/SRI 
program'' account a direct appropriation of $207,470,000 is 
requested for administrative expenses, and $160,000,000 is 
requested for a credit subsidy to cover the value of expected 
long-run costs associated with fiscal year 1997 insurance 
commitments.
    The amounts for administrative expenses are to be 
transferred from the FHA program accounts to the HUD ``Salaries 
and expenses'' accounts.
    Language is proposed to provide a commitment limitation 
amounting to $110,000,000,000 in the ``MMI/CMHI'' account and 
$17,400,000,000 in the ``GI/SRI'' account.
    In addition, HUD proposes direct loan programs in 1997 for 
multifamily bridge loans and single family purchase money 
mortgages to finance the sale of certain properties owned by 
the Department. Temporary financing would be provided for the 
acquisition and rehabilitation of multifamily projects by 
purchasers who have obtained commitments for permanent 
financing from another lender. Purchase money mortgages would 
enable governmental and nonprofit intermediaries to acquire 
properties for resale to owner-occupants in areas undergoing 
revitalization. For the MMI Program, a loan limitation of 
$200,000,000 is requested. For the GI/SRI Program, $120,000,000 
is requested as a loan limitation.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee has included the requested amounts for the 
``Mutual Mortgage Insurance Program'' account: a limitation on 
guaranteed loans of $110,000,000,000, a limitation on direct 
loans of $200,000,000, and an appropriation of $350,595,000 for 
administrative expenses. The administrative expenses 
appropriation will be transferred and merged with the sums in 
the Department's ``Salaries and expenses'' account.

                Government National Mortgage Association

                guarantees of mortgage-backed securities

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1996:

    Limitation on guaranteed loans

                                                      ($110,000,000,000)

    Administrative expenses

                                                              9,101,000 

Budget estimate, 1997:

    Limitation on guaranteed loans

                                                       (110,000,000,000)

    Administrative expenses

                                                              9,383,000 

House allowance:

    Limitation on guaranteed loans

                                                       (110,000,000,000)

    Administrative expenses

                                                              9,101,000 

Committee recommendation:

    Limitation on guaranteed loans

                                                       (110,000,000,000)

    Administrative expenses

                                                              9,383,000 

                          program description

    The Government National Mortgage Association [GNMA], 
through the mortgage-backed securities program, guarantees 
privately issued securities backed by pools of mortgages. GNMA 
is a wholly owned corporate instrumentality of the United 
States within the Department. Its powers are prescribed 
generally by title III of the National Housing Act, as amended. 
GNMA is authorized by section 306(g) of the act to guarantee 
the timely payment of principal and interest on securities that 
are based on and backed by a trust or pool composed of 
mortgages that are guaranteed and insured by the Federal 
Housing Administration, the Farmers Home Administration, or the 
Department of Veterans Affairs. GNMA's guarantee of mortgage-
backed securities is backed by the full faith and credit of the 
United States.
    In accord with the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 
1990 [OBRA] requirements for direct and guaranteed loan 
programs, the administration is requesting $9,383,000 for 
administrative expenses in the mortgage-backed securities 
program. Amounts to fund this direct appropriation to the ``MBS 
program'' account are to be derived from offsetting receipts 
transferred from the ``Mortgage-backed securities financing'' 
account to a Treasury receipt account.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends a limitation on new commitments of 
mortgage-backed securities of $110,000,000,000. This amount is 
the same level as proposed by the budget request and 
recommended by the House. The Committee also has included 
$9,383,000 for administrative expenses, the same as the budget 
request and $282,000 more than the level proposed by the House.

                    Policy Development and Research

                        research and technology

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $34,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      45,000,000
House allowance.........................................      34,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              34,000,000

                          program description

    Title V of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970, 
as amended, directs the Secretary of the Department of Housing 
and Urban Development to undertake programs of research, 
studies, testing, and demonstrations relating to the 
Department's mission and programs. These functions are carried 
out internally and through grants and contracts with industry, 
nonprofit research organizations, educational institutions, and 
through agreements with State and local governments and other 
Federal agencies. The research programs focus on ways to 
improve the efficiency, effectiveness, and equity of HUD 
programs and to identify methods to achieve cost reductions. 
Additionally, this appropriation is used to support HUD 
evaluation and monitoring activities and to conduct housing 
surveys.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $34,000,000 for research and 
technology activities in fiscal year 1997. This amount is 
$11,000,000 less than the budget request, and the same as the 
House allowance and the 1996 level.

                   Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

                        fair housing activities

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $30,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      33,000,000
House allowance.........................................      30,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              30,000,000

                          program description

    The fair housing activities appropriation includes funding 
for both the Fair Housing Assistance Program [FHAP] and the 
Fair Housing Initiatives Program [FHIP].
    The Fair Housing Assistance Program helps State and local 
agencies to implement title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 
1968, as amended, which prohibits discrimination in the sale, 
rental, and financing of housing and in the provision of 
brokerage services. The major objective of the program is to 
assure prompt and effective processing of title VIII complaints 
with appropriate remedies for complaints by State and local 
fair housing agencies.
    The Fair Housing Initiatives Program is authorized by 
section 561 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 
1987, as amended, and by section 905 of the Housing and 
Community Development Act of 1992. This initiative is designed 
to alleviate housing discrimination by increasing support to 
public and private organizations for the purpose of eliminating 
or preventing discrimination in housing, and to enhance fair 
housing opportunities.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommendation provides $30,000,000, of which 
$15,000,000 is for the fair housing assistance program [FHAP] 
and $15,000,000 is for the fair housing initiatives program 
[FHIP]. Additionally, the Committee agrees with the House 
recommendation for a study by GAO of the fair housing 
initiatives program to evaluate its financial accountability 
systems and its general effectiveness in combating housing 
discrimination.
    The Committee intends that funds appropriated to the fair 
housing initiatives program for enforcement of title VIII of 
the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended, which prohibits 
discrimination in the sale, rental, and financing of housing 
and in the provision of brokerage services, be used only to 
address such forms of discrimination as they are explicitly 
identified and specifically described in title VIII. 
Recognizing that there are limited resources available for FHIP 
activities, the Committee believes that FHIP funds should serve 
the purposes of Congress as reflected in the express language 
of title VIII.
    The Committee notes that HUD's Office of Fair Housing and 
Equal Opportunity has undertaken a variety of activities 
pertaining to property insurance under the authority of the 
Fair Housing Act. HUD recently testified that, due to 
congressional concern about such activities, it does not intend 
to focus its regulatory initiatives on property insurance. The 
Committee is encouraged by this statement, but remains 
concerned about HUD's use of funds for other fair housing 
activities aimed at property insurance practices.
    HUD's insurance-related activities duplicate State 
regulation of insurance. Every State and the District of 
Columbia have laws and regulations addressing unfair 
discrimination in property insurance and are actively 
investigating and addressing discrimination where it is found 
to occur. HUD's activities in this area create an unwarranted 
and unnecessary layer of Federal bureaucracy.
    The Fair Housing Act makes no mention of discrimination in 
property insurance. Moreover, neither it nor its legislative 
history suggests that Congress intended it to apply to the 
provision of property insurance. Indeed, Congress' intention, 
as expressly stated in the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 and 
repeatedly reaffirmed thereafter, is that, unless a Federal law 
specifically relates to the business of insurance, that law 
shall not apply where it would interfere with State insurance 
regulation. HUD's assertion of authority regarding property 
insurance contradicts this statutory mandate.

                     Management and Administration

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfers of funds)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        FHA funds by    GNMA funds by    CGDB funds by                  
                                                                      Appropriation       transfer         transfer         transfer          Total     
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996...............................................     $420,000,000     $532,782,000       $9,101,000         $675,000     $962,558,000
Budget estimate, 1997..............................................      430,718,000      546,782,000        9,383,000          675,000      987,558,000
House allowance....................................................      376,589,000      532,782,000        9,101,000          675,000      919,147,000
Committee recommendation...........................................      420,000,000      546,782,000        9,383,000          675,000      976,840,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    The recommendation includes a single ``Salaries and 
expenses'' account to finance all salaries and related expenses 
associated with administering the programs of the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development. These include the following 
activities:
    Housing and mortgage credit programs.--This activity 
includes staff salaries and related expenses associated with 
administering housing programs, the implementation of consumer 
protection activities in the areas of interstate land sales, 
mobile home construction and safety, and real estate settlement 
procedures.
    Community planning and development programs.--Funds in this 
activity are for staff salaries and expenses necessary to 
administer community planning and development programs.
    Equal opportunity and research programs.--This activity 
includes salaries and related expenses associated with 
implementing equal opportunity programs in housing and 
employment as required by law and executive orders and the 
administration of research programs and demonstrations.
    Departmental management, legal, and audit services.--This 
activity includes a variety of general functions required for 
the Department's overall administration and management. These 
include the Office of the Secretary, Office of General Counsel, 
Office of Chief Financial Officer, as well as administrative 
support in such areas as accounting, personnel management, 
contracting and procurement, and office services.
    Field direction and administration.--This activity includes 
salaries and expenses for the regional administrators, area 
office managers, and their staff who are responsible for the 
direction, supervision, and performance of the Department's 
field offices, as well as administration support in areas such 
as accounting, personnel management, contracting and 
procurement, and office services.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $420,000,000 
for salaries and expenses. This amount is the same level as the 
1996 appropriation, $10,718,000 less than the budget request, 
and $43,411,000 more than the House allowance. The 
appropriation includes the requested amount of $546,782,000 
transferred from various funds from the Federal Housing 
Administration, $9,383,000 transferred from the Government 
National Mortgage Association, and $675,000 from the 
``Community development'' appropriation.
    The Committee recommends the following changes to the 
budget request:

                      Office of Inspector General

                     (including transfer of funds)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       Drug                     
                                                                   FHA funds by     elimination                 
                                                   Appropriation     transfer         grants           Total    
                                                                                     transfer                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996............................     $36,567,000   ($11,283,000)  ..............   ($47,850,000)
Budget estimate, 1997...........................      36,567,000    (11,283,000)    ($5,000,000)    (52,850,000)
House allowance.................................      36,567,000    (11,283,000)     (5,000,000)    (52,850,000)
Committee recommendation........................      36,567,000    (11,283,000)     (5,000,000)    (52,850,000)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    This appropriation would finance all salaries and related 
expenses associated with the operation of the Office of the 
Inspector General.

                       committee recommendations

    The Committee recommends a funding level of $52,850,000 for 
the Office of Inspector General. This amount is $5,187,000 
above the 1996 level, the same as the budget request and the 
House allowance. This funding level includes $11,283,000 by 
transfer from various FHA funds and $5,000,000 from drug 
elimination grants, the same level as proposed in the budget 
request.

             Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight

                         salaries and expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $14,895,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      15,751,000
House allowance.........................................      14,895,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              15,751,000

                          program description

    This appropriation funds the Office of Federal Housing 
Enterprise Oversight [OFHEO], which was established in 1992 to 
regulate the financial safety and soundness of the two housing 
Government sponsored enterprises [GSE's], the Federal National 
Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage 
Corporation. The Office was authorized in the Federal Housing 
Enterprise Safety and Soundness Act of 1992, which also 
instituted a three-part capital standard for the GSE's, and 
gave the regulator enhanced authority to enforce those 
standards.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $15,751,000 for the Office of 
Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, the same level as the 
budget request. This is $856,000 more than the 1996 level and 
the House allowance.

                       Administrative Provisions

    Section 201 of the House-passed bill provides for the 
imposition of minimum rents by public housing agencies. This 
provision, however, is different from the minimum rent law that 
was enacted in January of this year in the Balanced Budget 
Downpayment Act, I. That provision provided for a minimum rent 
of at least $25 per month, with discretionary authority to 
impose a minimum rent of up to $50 per month, subject to a 
waiver procedure for such rents for up to 3 months to provide 
for a transitional period of adjustment. The provision passed 
by the House proposes to change the minimum rent calculation by 
permitting the imposition of a minimum rent of up to $25 per 
month.
    The Committee recommends the simple extension of current 
law with respect to minimum rents so as to avoid further 
confusion and uncertainty as to the responsibilities of 
residents in meeting some portion of the costs of their 
housing.
    The House-passed bill does not continue any of the 
nonsavings housing reform provisions enacted in appropriations 
legislation for the last 2 fiscal years. Furthermore, the 
measure, as passed the House, does not contain any provisions 
governing a workout process for that portion of the multifamily 
inventory which is facing contract expirations in fiscal year 
1997.
    Both the Fiscal Year 1995 Emergency Supplemental and 
Rescission Act (Public Law 104-19) and the fiscal year 1996 
appropriation legislation (Public Law 104-99 and Public Law 
104-134) enacted numerous legislative provisions reforming 
public and assisted housing policies. In deference to the 
authorizing committees of jurisdiction, these legislative 
packages were limited to that fiscal year, at the end of which 
the programs would revert back to prior law.
    An exception has been made with respect to those reforms 
which have a budgetary effect, such as changes which reduce the 
expenditure rate of already appropriated funds. An example of 
this is the 3-month delay in reissuance of section 8 
certificates and vouchers. This provision, which was enacted 
last year and is again recommended by the House for fiscal year 
1997, delays the use of section 8 funds where a previously 
assisted resident moves out prior to the end of the section 8 
contract term. Rather than immediately permitting the PHA to 
provide rental assistance to another family with the remaining 
funds, a deferral of 3 months is imposed.
    While it has no effect on budget authority, it is estimated 
to reduce fiscal year 1997 outlays by $151,000,000 by slowing 
down the expenditure of this previously appropriated funding. 
This is contrasted with simple policy reform which may have the 
effect of reducing the cost of operations of public housing on 
a prospective basis, and only reducing the demand for future 
discretionary appropriations. The House-passed appropriations 
bill, however, does include the following provisions which 
reduce fiscal year 1997 outlays:
  --Caps PHA section 8 administrative fees at 7 percent 
        (-$80,000,000);
  --Requires a 3-month delay in reissuance of section 8 
        assistance (-$151,000,000) (described above);
  --Mandates a minimum rent of $25 (-$24,000,000);
  --Extends the waiver of existing law with respect to 
        disposition of foreclosed properties in the FHA 
        multifamily inventory (-$80,000,000);
  --Limits annual adjustments on high-cost project-based 
        multifamily contracts and on units in which existing 
        residents don't move (-$164,000,000); and
  --Makes applicable the FHA single-family assignment reform 
        provisions applicable to loans closed during fiscal 
        year 1997 (-$128,000,000).
    By contrast, the House, in deference to legislation pending 
before their authorizing committee, did not seek to reenact 
housing policy reform provisions which do not have budgetary 
effect. This means that repeal of the Federal selection 
criteria, take-one, take-all, and endless lease repeals 
applicable to section 8; and the rent reform, selection 
criteria, modernization flexibility, and one-for-one 
replacement rule reforms affecting public housing will lapse on 
October 1.
    The Committee recommendation includes all such public 
housing and section 8 reforms. Permitting these program reforms 
to lapse would be confusing, disruptive, and very costly. The 
Committee affirms its support for the enactment of 
comprehensive reform legislation and anticipates explicitly 
such permanent legislation superseding the interim 
appropriations reforms.
    The Committee recommends a new administrative provision 
designated section 205 which recaptures up to $20,000,000 of 
funds previously appropriated for the Nehemiah homeownership 
program and redirects their use for a targeted homeownership 
effort in inner city areas which can serve as anchors for 
neighborhood revitalization efforts.
    Section 206 of the bill, as recommended by the Committee, 
provides loan forgiveness for a defaulted public facility loan 
to Greene County, MS. This loan financed a rural health clinic 
which subsequently failed and has been adjudged bankrupt.
    Sections 207 and 208 provide for the disposition and 
utilization of funds related to the currently inactive section 
236 program of the National Housing Act. These provisions are 
identical to language included by the House under 
appropriations paragraphs in title II of this bill.
    The Committee recommends a new section designated 209 which 
provides a temporary waiver of rules which would otherwise 
result in the recapture and loss of modernization funds 
previously allocated to the D.C. Public Housing Authority. 
Recapture of these funds is pending because this housing 
authority failed to utilize these sums in a timely manner. That 
is one of the major reasons that a court-ordered receiver was 
appointed and this very troubled agency, removed from D.C. 
government control. This provision will grant the receiver 
additional time to demonstrate effective management of the 
modernization program, in a manner which holds the receiver 
accountable for timely performance from the point at which the 
receivership was established.
    Section 210 continues a provision which permits the sharing 
of refinancing savings between State housing finance agencies 
and the Federal Government. This provision was enacted in 
previous years, and included in the House-passed bill under the 
``Annual contributions'' account.

Multifamily portfolio restructuring

    The administration has proposed a portfolio reengineering 
proposal to deal with the inventory of FHA insured, project-
based section 8 assisted multifamily housing projects. The HUD 
proposal, however, is oriented toward a third-party liquidation 
mechanism to direct project specific workouts incentivized on 
the basis of financial returns. The HUD proposal also seeks to 
discontinue FHA guarantees and project-based assistance.
    The House Appropriations Committee recommended a 1-year 
program of workouts which would grant the administration most 
of the authorities they requested, and would have permitted 
renewal of expiring project-based section 8 contracts at the 
lower of current contract rates or a comparable street rent (as 
contrasted with the generally higher fair market rent).
    Although the House Committee proposal applied only to those 
developments with expiring section 8 contracts in fiscal year 
1997 and with subsidies at rent levels in excess of market, 
this represented a significant step toward the initiating a 
workout program resembling the administration's position. These 
provisions have been stricken from the bill as passed by the 
House.
    The complex and confusing nature of multifamily housing 
activities rarely permits deliberate formulation of a policy on 
its merits. Instead, proposals are judged largely on the 
reaction of certain groups or interests. This is the principal 
reason why Federal housing programs are so expensive: they have 
to satisfy many insatiable appetites and, heretofore, have not 
been subject to rigorous budgetary scrutiny. It is, therefore, 
salutary that current proposals are being examined for overall 
economic and budgetary effect. This bottom-line assessment 
provides some external discipline to what has been little more 
than a popularity contest.
    Continuing existing subsidy arrangements would be very 
popular given the growing concern over the implications of 
reduced funding on maintaining this assisted housing inventory. 
Unfortunately, while it is possible to temporalize and 
forestall unpleasant actions for some limited period, the 
growing tide of discretionary budget cuts soon will force the 
abandonment of such policies. Failing to anticipate these 
changes can lead to even greater disruption and loss of 
affordable housing stock, at a greater total cost to the 
Government.
    The recently enacted appropriations act for fiscal year 
1996 contains a very broad demonstration authority to permit 
HUD and property owners to explore a variety of workout 
procedures. That measure provided an appropriation of 
$30,000,000 for this purpose, applicable to voluntary deals 
proposed by property owners whose section 8 contracts would 
expire over the next 2 fiscal years. Until some tax relief is 
given, this represents the best opportunity to explore 
alternative workout arrangements.
    The Committee is exploring mechanisms to augment funding of 
this demonstration and to establish certain set-asides to 
require the evaluation of workout strategies which are 
disfavored by the Department such as continuing FHA insurance 
and project-based rental assistance.
    With respect to the expiring section 8 contracts, budgetary 
constraints will not permit continued renewal of contracts at 
current payment levels. The Balanced Budget Downpayment Act, I, 
enacted in January of this year, specified that multifamily 
housing contracts expiring in fiscal year 1996 be renewed at 
current rates for a term of 1 year. That provision established 
a basic renewal policy which will take effect on October 1, 
1996, that constrains future renewals of such contracts at a 
level subject to the section 8 existing fair market rent [FMR]. 
This limitation on renewals in fiscal year 1997 prohibits 
contract extensions above 120 percent of the section 8 FMR rent 
level. The Secretary has the authority to permit renewals up to 
this level to the extent that these rents are reasonable for 
the housing involved and are necessary to prevent displacement 
of residents. Despite this flexibility, rents limited to 120 
percent of FMR will force a number of projects with expiring 
section 8 contracts into default during the up coming fiscal 
year.
    This funding shortfall for some multifamily projects has 
prompted an assessment of alternative renewal policies. One 
such approach was the renewal policy advanced by the House 
Committee which would have imposed a comparable street rent 
limitation on renewals. Another alternative would be to use a 
budget-based rent computation to determine subsidy levels. 
Budget-based rents are calculated on the basis of adding up 
debt service, reasonable operating costs, and some limited 
return on equity, to determine the cash flow level necessary to 
maintain these projects. This process has been in use for years 
to determine permissible rent levels for sections 236 and 
221(d)(3) projects. The Committee is evaluating the policy and 
budgetary implications of these alternatives.
    The Committee recommends inclusion of a new section 211 to 
institute a renewal policy governing expiring project-based 
section 8 contracts for fiscal year 1997 only. Furthermore, 
this provision, which waives the previously enacted 
restrictions of section 405 of the Balanced Budget Downpayment 
Act, I (Public Law 104-99), will permit the Secretary to renew 
these expiring contracts for a 1-year term at the lesser of the 
current contract rent or the comparable market rent. Two 
important additional authorities are granted under this 
provision: first, the Secretary is permitted to extend subsidy 
contracts, at currently contracted rent levels, for State 
agency-financed projects which do not have mortgages guaranteed 
by the Federal Housing Administration [FHA]. Second, the 
Secretary is permitted to renew expiring project-based 
contracts at levels in excess of the comparable market rent, or 
the currently contracted rent, if such rent level would be 
inadequate to meet reasonable operating costs and debt service. 
This second exemption from current law is intended to provide a 
temporary increase in the permissible section 8 subsidy to 
avoid mortgage default for projects which currently require 
excessive ongoing rental subsidies. No return on equity is 
permitted under this authority, and this renewal authority is 
available only through fiscal year 1997.
    The Committee's recommendation represents a compromise 
between a renewal policy which would seek to maintain current 
contract rents, as advocated by project owners and resident 
groups, and more fiscally constrained steps which would lead to 
some resident displacement and financial losses by project 
owners and investors. It must be clearly understood, however, 
that current budgetary constraints will not permit continued 
payment of these excessively high rental subsidies, and major 
restructuring of the financing and operating costs of this 
inventory is inevitable if these projects are to survive as 
affordable housing stock.
    Statistical data provided by HUD indicates that in fiscal 
year 1997, section 8 subsidy contracts in as many as 2,169 
multifamily housing projects, with nearly 132,000 rental units 
may be expiring with rents which exceed current fair market 
rent limits. It is clear that such excessive rental subsidies 
cannot be sustained indefinitely. However, until a reasonable 
and effective mechanism is implemented to deal with this 
inventory in a manner which does not lead to wholesale resident 
displacement, the Committee cannot recommend inaction in the 
face of potential widespread defaults.
    Failure to adjust current renewal policies and authorities 
to deal effectively with excessively debt-burdened properties 
would result in an accelerated liquidation of this inventory. 
These defaults will require tens of billions of expenditures by 
the Federal Housing Administration [FHA] fund in loan guarantee 
claims, potential displacement of families from affordable 
housing, and further deterioration and disinvestment in 
distressed neighborhoods.
    Unfortunately, only limited progress has been made in 
reaching consensus on a fiscally prudent strategy to handle 
rental subsidy and property disposition procedures which 
addresses adequately the shortage of available affordable 
housing for low-income families and neighborhood development 
needs of our cities. Last year the administration proposed a 
mark-to-market scheme which was designed to reduce subsidy 
levels to comparable street rents by offering only tenant-based 
assistance. The plan advanced would deal with the resulting 
defaults through a expedited liquidation procedure. This year 
the administration unveiled a portfolio reengineering proposal 
which added incentives for project owners to proactively 
restructure their project financing prior to section 8 contract 
expiration.
    These proposals have not received significant support in 
the Congress. As noted earlier, the House Appropriations 
Committee proposed a renewal and project workout program which 
was stricken out in floor debate in the House, largely due to 
objections interposed by the authorizing committee of 
jurisdiction. Unfortunately that committee has not yet 
considered any legislation dealing with this looming crisis 
which involves over 850,000 units of low-income housing, about 
one-quarter of the entire federally subsidized housing 
inventory.
    Recently, the Senate authorizing committee of jurisdiction 
convened a hearing on legislation it is developing and may soon 
introduce. The delay in submission of this proposed legislation 
reflects the complexity of the issues and the financial 
arrangements underpinning this inventory. Furthermore, it has 
not yet been determined that current budgetary constraints will 
permit enactment of this legislation in its present form.
    To prevent unnecessary disruption and loss in this 
multifamily housing inventory, Congress enacted legislation 
which permitted renewals of expiring project-based section 
contracts at current contract rent levels. This authority 
applies only to contracts expiring in fiscal year 1996, and 
allows contract extensions of 1 year in duration. In addition, 
earlier this year, the Congress enacted legislation proposed by 
this Committee which established a FHA multifamily housing 
demonstration which grants the Department authority to 
experiment with a wide variety of workout strategies and 
techniques to identify efficient and effective means of 
maintaining this very valuable inventory of affordable housing. 
The demonstration is limited to a total of 15,000 units and 
$30,000,000 was appropriated for this purpose.
    The Department recently published guidelines for 
implementation of this demonstration, and it is hoped that 
individual project proposals will be under evaluation and 
negotiation shortly. The Committee considers this demonstration 
as the best opportunity to develop the attention, 
understanding, and consensus necessary to enact and implement a 
formal multifamily portfolio restructuring program.
    The Committee recommends, in a new section designated 212, 
a modest augmentation of this demonstration with the 
appropriation of an additional $10,000,000 to carry out 
individual project debt restructuring and subsidy commitments. 
In particular, the additional sum is to evaluate the technique 
of carrying out debt restructuring with soft second mortgages 
instead of simple debt forgiveness which may have very adverse 
tax consequences for project owners. This means of achieving 
lower operating cost is a central focus of the proposal under 
consideration by the Senate authorizing committee.
    The Committee recommends a new section designated 213 which 
would facilitate the extension of assistance under the HOME 
program to lands set-aside under the Hawaiian Homes Commission 
Act (Act of July 9, 1921) for the benefit of native Hawaiians. 
Three recent studies document the fact that native Hawaiians 
have the most severe unmet housing needs in the United States, 
and this amendment is designed to facilitate access to existing 
Federal housing programs that are designed to address such 
needs.
                    TITLE III--INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

                  American Battle Monuments Commission

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $20,265,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      20,400,000
House allowance.........................................      22,265,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              22,265,000

                          program description

    The American Battle Monuments Commission [ABMC] is 
responsible for the maintenance and construction of U.S. 
monuments and memorials commemorating the achievements in 
battle of our Armed Forces since April 1917; for controlling 
the erection of monuments and markers by U.S. citizens and 
organizations in foreign countries; and for the design, 
construction, and maintenance of permanent military cemetery 
memorials in foreign countries. The Commission maintains 24 
military cemetery memorials on foreign soil; 17 monuments and 
memorials not a part of the cemeteries; and 4 bronze tablets. 
In addition, the Commission administers four large memorials on 
U.S. soil. It is presently charged with erecting a Korean and a 
World War II war veterans memorial in the Washington, DC, area.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,265,000 
for the American Battle Monuments Commission, as provided by 
the House. This is an increase of $1,865,000 above the budget 
estimate and $2,000,000 above the enacted level. The increase 
is needed due to the continued decline in the value of the 
dollar in foreign currency markets, and will ensure that 
critical maintenance projects will be conducted at U.S. 
monuments and memorials.

                       Department of the Treasury

              Community Development Financial Institutions

   Community Development Financial Institutions Fund Program Account

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $45,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     125,000,000
House allowance.........................................      45,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              45,000,000

                          Program Description

    The community development financial institutions [CDFI] 
fund would provide grants, loans, and technical assistance to 
new and existing community development financial institutions 
such as community development banks, community development 
credit unions, revolving loan funds, and microloan funds. 
Recipient institutions would be required to support mortgage, 
small business, and economic development lending in currently 
underserved, distressed neighborhoods.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $45,000,000 
for the ``CDFI program'' account within the Department of the 
Treasury. This is the same level provided in the fiscal year 
1996 appropriations bill and the House allowance. This amount 
is $80,000,000 less than the budget request. The Committee does 
not believe it prudent to provide such a large increase for 
this new program which is in the initial stages of beginning 
operations and only now is preparing to issue its first round 
of awards from funding provided for fiscal year 1995.

                   Consumer Product Safety Commission

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $40,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      42,500,000
House allowance.........................................      42,500,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              42,500,000

                          program description

    The Commission is an independent regulatory agency that was 
established on May 14, 1973, and is responsible for protecting 
the public against unreasonable risks of injury from consumer 
products; assisting consumers to evaluate the comparative 
safety of consumer products; developing uniform safety 
standards for consumer products and minimizing conflicting 
State and local regulations; and promoting research and 
investigation into the causes and prevention of product-related 
deaths, illnesses, and injuries.
    In carrying out its mandate, the Commission establishes 
mandatory product safety standards, where appropriate, to 
reduce the unreasonable risk of injury to consumers from 
consumer products; helps industry develop voluntary safety 
standards; bans unsafe products if it finds that a safety 
standard is not feasible; monitors recalls of defective 
products; informs and educates consumers about product hazards; 
conducts research and develops test methods; collects and 
publishes injury and hazard data, and promotes uniform product 
regulations by governmental units.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee concurs with the House in providing 
$42,500,000 for the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the 
same as the budget estimate and $2,500,000 above the current 
level.

             Corporation for National and Community Service

                national and community service programs

                           operating expenses

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $400,500,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     543,549,000
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                                             400,500,000

                          program description

    The Corporation for National and Community Service, a 
Corporation owned by the Federal Government, was established by 
the National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993 (Public 
Law 103-82) to enhance opportunities for national and community 
service and provide national service educational awards. The 
Corporation makes grants to States, institutions of higher 
education, public and private nonprofit organizations, and 
others to create service opportunities for a wide variety of 
individuals such as students, out-of-school youth, and adults 
through innovative, full-time national and community service 
programs. National service participants may receive educational 
awards which may be used for full-time or part-time higher 
education, vocational education, job training, or school-to-
work programs.
    The Corporation is governed by a board of directors and 
headed by the Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation. Board 
members and the Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation are 
appointed by the President of the United States and confirmed 
by the Senate.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $400,500,000 
for the Corporation for National and Community Service. Of this 
amount, $59,000,000 is for educational awards; $215,000,000 is 
for grants under the National Service Trust, including the 
AmeriCorps program; $5,500,000 is for the Points of Light 
Foundation; $18,000,000 is for the Civilian Community Corps; 
$43,000,000 is available for school-based and community-based 
service-learning programs; $30,000,000 is for quality and 
innovation activities; $25,000,000 is administrative expenses; 
and $5,000,000 is for audits and other evaluations. The total 
amount appropriated and each of the program earmarks are 
identical to the level appropriated for fiscal year 1996.
    The House-passed bill provides no funding for the 
Corporation. The Committee recommendation is $143,049,000 less 
than the budget estimate. In consideration of the substantial 
controversy surrounding this program, the Committee believes it 
prudent to maintain these previously established funding levels 
for 1 additional fiscal year. The Committee directs the 
Corporation to pursue aggressively efforts to correct material 
weaknesses in its accounting and administrative control 
structure identified in the inspector general audit issued 
earlier this year.

                      Office of Inspector General

Appropriations, 1996....................................      $2,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................       2,125,000
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                                               2,000,000

                          Program Description

    The Office of Inspector General within the Corporation for 
National and Community Service is authorized by the Inspector 
General Act of 1978, as amended. The goals of the Office are to 
increase organizational efficiency and effectiveness and to 
prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. The Office of Inspector 
General within the Corporation for National and Community 
Service was transferred to the Corporation from the former 
ACTION agency when ACTION was abolished and merged into the 
Corporation in April 1994.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,000,000 for 
the Office of Inspector General. This is the same amount 
appropriated for this Office in fiscal year 1996 and $125,000 
less than the budget request.

                     U.S. Court of Veterans Appeals

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1996....................................      $9,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................       8,795,000
House allowance.........................................      10,640,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               9,229,000

                          program description

    The Court of Veterans Appeals was established by the 
Veterans' Judicial Review Act. The court has exclusive 
jurisdiction to review decisions of the Board of Veterans' 
Appeals. It has the authority to decide all relevant questions 
of law, interpret constitutional, statutory, and regulatory 
provisions, and determine the meaning or applicability of the 
terms of an action by the Department of Veterans Affairs. It is 
authorized to compel action by the Department unlawfully 
withheld or unreasonably delayed. It is authorized to hold 
unlawful and set-aside decisions, findings, conclusions, rules 
and regulations issued or adopted by the Department of Veterans 
Affairs or the Board of Veterans' Appeals.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $9,229,000 for the Court of 
Veterans Appeals, an increase of $434,000 over the budget 
estimate and $229,000 above the 1996 level. The recommendation 
includes $700,000 for the pro bono representation program.
    While the court has complained about the inclusion of the 
pro bono program in its budget, the Committee does not believe 
there is a more suitable funding arrangement available at this 
time. The Committee notes the court was responsible originally 
for proposing funding for this program in its budget.
    All appropriate efforts should be made to see that the pro 
bono program is as cost effective as possible and serving those 
veterans most in need of legal services.

                      Department of Defense--Civil

                       Cemeterial Expenses, Army

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $11,946,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      11,600,000
House allowance.........................................      11,600,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              11,600,000

                          program description

    Responsibility for the operation of Arlington National 
Cemetery and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemetery is 
vested in the Secretary of the Army. As of September 30, 1992, 
Arlington and Soldiers' and Airmen's Home National Cemeteries 
contained the remains of 246,023 persons and comprised a total 
of approximately 628 acres. There were 3,353 interments and 
1,662 inurnments in fiscal year 1995; 3,500 interments and 
1,800 inurnments are estimated for the current fiscal year; and 
3,500 interments and 1,900 inurnments are estimated for fiscal 
year 1997.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $11,600,000 
for the Army's cemeterial expenses. This amount is $346,000 
less than the 1996 enacted level and the same as the House 
amount.

                    Environmental Protection Agency

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $6,528,027,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   7,041,917,000
House allowance.........................................   6,568,627,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           6,598,172,000

                          general description

    The Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] was created 
through Executive Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970 designed to 
consolidate certain Federal Government environmental activities 
into a single agency. The plan was submitted by the President 
to the Congress on July 8, 1970, and the Agency was established 
as an independent agency in the executive branch on December 2, 
1970, by consolidating 15 components from 5 departments and 
independent agencies.
    A description of EPA's pollution control programs by media 
follows:
    Air.--The Clean Air Act Amendments [CAA] of 1990 authorize 
a national program of air pollution research, regulation, 
prevention, and enforcement activities.
    Water quality.--The Clean Water Act [CWA], as amended in 
1977, 1981, and 1987, provides the framework for protection of 
the Nation's surface waters. The law recognizes that it is the 
primary responsibility of the States to prevent, reduce, and 
eliminate water pollution. The States determine the desired 
uses for their waters, set standards, identify current uses 
and, where uses are being impaired or threatened, develop plans 
for the protection or restoration of the designated use. They 
implement the plans through control programs such as permitting 
and enforcement, construction of municipal waste water 
treatment works, and nonpoint source control practices. The CWA 
also regulates discharge of dredge or fill material into waters 
of the United States, including wetlands.
    Drinking water.--The Safe Drinking Water Act [SDWA] of 1974 
charged EPA with the responsibility of implementing a program 
to assure that the Nation's public drinking water supplies are 
free of contamination that may pose a human health risk, and to 
protect and prevent the endangerment of ground water resources 
which serve as drinking water supplies.
    Hazardous waste.--The Resource Conservation and Recovery 
Act of 1976 [RCRA] mandated EPA to develop a regulatory program 
to protect human health and the environment from improper 
hazardous waste disposal practices. The RCRA Program manages 
hazardous wastes from generation through disposal.
    EPA's responsibilities and authorities to manage hazardous 
waste were greatly expanded under the Hazardous and Solid Waste 
Amendments of 1984. Not only did the regulated universe of 
wastes and facilities dealing with hazardous waste increase 
significantly, but past mismanagement practices, in particular 
prior releases at inactive hazardous and solid waste management 
units, were to be identified and corrective action taken. The 
1984 amendments also authorized a regulatory and implementation 
program directed to owners and operators of underground storage 
tanks.
    Pesticides.--The objective of the Pesticide Program is to 
protect the public health and the environment from unreasonable 
risks while permitting the use of necessary pest control 
approaches. This objective is pursued by EPA under the Federal 
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act [FIFRA] and the 
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act [FFDCA] through three 
principal means: (1) review of existing and new pesticide 
products; (2) enforcement of pesticide use rules; and (3) 
research and development to reinforce the ability to evaluate 
the risks and benefits of pesticides.
    Radiation.--The radiation program's major emphasis is to 
minimize the exposure of persons to ionizing radiation, whether 
from naturally occurring sources, from medical or industrial 
applications, nuclear power sources, or weapons development.
    Toxic substances.--The Toxic Substances Control Act [TSCA] 
establishes a program to stimulate the development of adequate 
data on the effects of chemical substances on health and the 
environment, and institute control action for those chemicals 
which present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the 
environment. The act's coverage affects more than 60,000 
chemicals currently in commerce, and all new chemicals.
    Multimedia.--Multimedia activities are designed to support 
programs where the problems, tools, and results are cross media 
and must be integrated to effect results. This integrated 
program encompasses the Agency's research, enforcement, and 
abatement activities.
    Superfund.--The Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 [CERCLA] established a 
national program to protect public health and the environment 
from the threats posed by inactive hazardous waste sites and 
uncontrolled spills of hazardous substances. The original 
statute was amended by the Superfund Amendments and 
Reauthorization Act of 1986 [SARA]. Under these authorities, 
EPA manages a hazardous waste site cleanup program including 
emergency response and long-term remediation.
    Leaking underground storage tanks.--The Superfund 
Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 [SARA] established 
the leaking underground storage tank [LUST] trust fund to 
conduct corrective actions for releases from leaking 
underground storage tanks that contain petroleum or other 
hazardous substances. EPA implements the LUST response program 
primarily through cooperative agreements with the States.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends a total of $6,598,172,000 for EPA. 
This is a decrease of $443,745,000 below the budget request, 
$29,545,000 above the House, and an increase of $70,145,000 
above the current budget.
    The reduction from the President's request is attributable 
primarily to (1) the lack of funding for the proposed Research 
Triangle Park laboratory facility ($182,000,000), (2) the 
elimination of site-specific wastewater earmarks 
($113,000,000), and (3) reducing the climate change action plan 
and environmental technology programs to current levels 
($119,000,000).
    The Committee's recommendation for EPA includes more than 
$2,850,000,000 for grants to State and tribes for the 
implementation of environmental programs, including grants for 
the remediation of leaking underground storage tanks. Increases 
are recommended for several State grant programs including 
State revolving funds ($78,000,000), leaking underground 
storage tank grants ($14,000,000), and the categorical State 
grants ($16,000,000).
    Funding for States represents 43 percent of the EPA 
appropriation and reflects the high priority the Committee has 
afforded to programs directly benefiting States. The Committee 
expects EPA will continue to work with the States to redefine 
and improve the EPA-State relationship, including the 
devolution of responsibilities to States wherever appropriate, 
fostering trust, streamlining administrative activities, and 
eliminating duplicative, redundant actions.
    The Committee has provided the full budget request of 
$1,394,245,000 for the Superfund program, and expects the 
agency will continue to employ a risk-based prioritization 
methodology to allocate Superfund resources, particularly in 
view of the increasing number of sites reaching the 
construction phase of the Superfund pipeline. The Committee 
further expects EPA will remedy management shortcomings to 
ensure sites ready for construction funds can receive funds as 
timely as possible.
    For the operating programs, the Committee has provided some 
increases above the current levels to ensure adequate funding 
for EPA's regulatory, enforcement, policymaking, and research 
functions. Funding has been provided to meet payroll 
requirements for current employment levels and continue work 
performed through contractual arrangements. Reductions have 
been applied to nonessential or lower priority activities.
    The Committee strongly believes that diminishing resources 
at every level of government make it imperative that we 
allocate funds to those areas where we can achieve the most 
environmental protection for the dollars invested. We can no 
longer afford to act without a rational, risk-based strategic 
approach to protecting human health and the environment. 
Instead, as NAPA recommended in its 1995 report to the 
Congress, EPA's effectiveness, and the allocation of its 
resources, should be based on real progress in protecting human 
health and cleaning up the environment. The Committee intends 
to measure EPA's activities in this way.

                         SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $525,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997................................... \1\ 578,748,000
House allowance......................................... \1\ 538,500,000
Committee recommendation................................ \1\ 545,000,000

\1\ Does not include transfer from Superfund account.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    EPA's ``Science and technology'' account provides funding 
for the scientific knowledge and tools necessary to support 
decisions on preventing, regulating, and abating environmental 
pollution and to advance the base of understanding on 
environmental sciences. These efforts are conducted through 
contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements with 
universities, industries, other private commercial firms, 
nonprofit organizations, State and local government, and 
Federal agencies, as well as through work performed at EPA's 
laboratories and various field stations and field offices.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $545,000,000 for science and 
technology, an increase of $6,500,000 over the House amount, 
$20,000,000 over the enacted level, and a decrease of 
$33,748,000 below the budget request. In addition, the 
Committee recommends the transfer of $35,000,000 from the 
Superfund account, for a total of $580,000,000 for science and 
technology. This represents an increase of $55,000,000 above 
the enacted level.
    The significant increase reflects in part the Committee's 
approval of a working capital fund. Resources for the working 
capital fund, formerly included in the ``Environmental programs 
and management'' appropriation, account for $33,000,000 of the 
increase.
    The Committee has made the following changes from the 
budget request:
  -$17,600,000 from the environmental technology initiative. 
        The remaining funds, $10,000,000, are provided for 
        technology verification activities, in view of the need 
        for EPA verification of cost and performance of new 
        technologies.
  -$7,000,000 from academic fellowships, resulting in an 
        appropriation of $8,000,000, an increase of $1,000,000 
        over the current year level.
  -$8,000,000 from the increase requested for additional full-
        time equivalent employees above the 1996 level, subject 
        to normal reprogramming guidelines.
  -$10,000,000 from the increase requested for the climate 
        change action plan.
  +$1,700,000 for the American Water Works Association Research 
        Foundation for continuation of this cost-shared 
        research effort on drinking water issues.
  +$1,500,000 for the Water Environment Research Foundation for 
        continuation of this cost-shared research effort on 
        water quality issues.
  +$1,000,000 for research on the health effects of arsenic.
  +$1,500,000 for the experimental program to stimulate 
        cooperative research [EPSCoR].
  +$750,000 to continue the Resource Agricultural Policy 
        Systems Program, which provides analyses of possible 
        environmental and economic impacts of agricultural 
        programs.
  +$750,000 for the lower Mississippi River interagency cancer 
        study [LMRICS]. The Committee recognizes the potential 
        of the LMRICS study to prove useful on a national scale 
        in examining and perhaps linking environmental factors 
        to the incidence of cancer in certain regions of the 
        country. This study will involve monitoring the 
        environment and communities in the target area in 
        Louisiana over a period of 4 years. Therefore, it is 
        important that EPA continue to allocate funds for 
        LMRICS in the future.
  +$750,000 for research on environmental lung disease through 
        the National Jewish Center for Immunology and 
        Respiratory Medicine.
  +$1,000,000 for the Center for Air Toxics Metals.
  +$300,000 for the clean air status and trends network 
        [CASTNet] monitoring stations in New England. These 
        stations provide unique indicators of environmental 
        quality and data on acid deposition rates to lakes, 
        forest fire climatology, regional meteorology, and 
        mapping of the distribution of pollutants in the 
        region. After completion of the ongoing review of 
        CASTNet, EPA is to work with Vermont and other 
        interested States to develop a mechanism to transfer 
        the responsibility of operating and maintaining the 
        stations to State agencies in New England while 
        retaining data analysis functions within EPA. The funds 
        provided will allow for the collection and analysis of 
        data from the five New England CASTNet sites.
  -$398,000 as a general reduction, subject to normal 
        reprogramming guidelines.
    The Committee recommends a transfer of $35,000,000 from the 
Superfund account for Superfund research, in lieu of the 
administration's request of $43,000,000. This level reflects an 
increase of $14,500,000 over the 1996 level. Of the amount 
provided, $2,500,000 is included for the Gulf Coast Hazardous 
Substance Research Center and $5,000,000 is provided for the 
Mine Waste Technology Program. These funds will enable the 
completion of the Mine Waste Technology Program and the 
transition to the private sector.
    EPA should consider funding under the Superfund research 
program phytoremediation technologies which could be used to 
remove toxic waste from soil at lower cost than traditional 
approaches.
    The Committee directs EPA to provide a report within 6 
months of enactment of this act on the EPA EPSCoR program, 
including what has been accomplished, the relationship between 
EPA's EPSCoR program and EPSCoR programs in other Federal 
agencies, how the program is coordinated with and relates to 
EPA's Science-to-Achieve-Results Program, and whether this 
program should be enhanced in an effort to increase EPA-funded 
academic-based research in States that traditionally have 
received smaller amounts of Federal research and development 
funds. EPA is to model the EPA EPSCoR program after the 
National Science Foundation's EPSCoR program and coordinate the 
structure and selection process with NSF.
    Finally, as part of EPA's STAR program, EPA is encouraged 
to give special consideration to proposals from EPSCoR States 
that successfully meet the agency's peer review requirements 
and are identified in the agency's competitive award process.
    With the exception of the environmental technology 
verification [ETV] program, the Committee has not provided 
funding for EPA's environmental technology initiative [ETI] due 
to concerns that EPA has not articulated effectively its role 
and strategy in the development and commercialization of new 
environmental technologies. Moreover, many of the grants 
awarded under this program in previous years appeared to be 
duplicative of private sector efforts, and not part of a 
coherent strategy.
    Third party verification of new environmental technologies, 
under the auspices of the Federal Government, however, 
represents an important unmet need and funds have been reserved 
for this purpose. Clearly, there is significant interest in the 
public and private sectors for EPA certification of new cost-
effective technologies to cleanup and prevent pollution. EPA is 
to work closely with affected parties in developing an 
appropriate strategy for environmental technology verification, 
and to keep the Committee apprised of its progress.
    While the Committee has limited funding for ETI to 
verification activities, the Committee supports EPA's 
leadership in interagency cooperation that will pave the way 
for U.S. companies to export environmental technologies. To 
that end, EPA should provide a progress report summarizing its 
cooperative activities currently underway with NASA, as well as 
future activities with other U.S. Government agencies, such as 
the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, the 
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology [NIST], within 
90 days of enactment of this act.
    The Committee is aware of an effort by the Texas Regional 
Institute for Environmental Studies and petrochemical 
businesses in Texas to develop a center for the certification 
of new cost-effective technologies to be applied to Superfund 
and other environmental restoration problems. In view of the 
regulatory burden on the chemical and petrochemical industries 
and the need for cost-effective, scientifically based tools to 
comply with environmental regulations, EPA should consider 
providing support to this effort as part of the environmental 
technology verification program.
    EPA should give close consideration to a proposal by the 
Institute for Environmental and Industrial Science in San 
Marcos, TX, to carry out environmental biomonitoring and 
technology research and development activities to assist the 
petrochemical and other industries in complying with 
environmental laws.
    The Committee notes the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, in 
partnership with the States of Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming, 
Missouri, and Oklahoma, have proposed the creation of a 
Wetlands Hydrology Center to develop an understanding of the 
hydrology and hydrogeology of wetlands in the Central Great 
Plains. Knowledge gained would be used to help preserve 
wetlands, help property owners develop good stewardship 
programs to comply with Federal regulations, and to develop a 
scientific data base for restoration of existing wetlands. 
Given the high-priority nature of this work, EPA should give 
consideration to funding this program.
    The Committee supports the full budget request for drinking 
water research, particularly microbial/disinfection byproducts 
research. The current state of knowledge about the health 
effects of microbial contamination, and the ability to test and 
treat for such contamination are greatly lacking.
    The Committee recognizes the improvements made in EPA's 
research program, including the recent completion of a risk-
based strategic plan, improved and more consistent peer review 
practices, a new emphasis on academic-based research, and the 
realignment of the laboratory organizational structure 
according to a risk paradigm. The new structure and the 
strategic plan better enable EPA to prioritize activities.
    The Committee supports a joint effort currently underway by 
the Office of Research and Development and the EPA program and 
regional offices to implement a more systematic process to 
identifying the types and quantities of technical support 
provided by ORD and to ensure more efficient use of available 
resources. The process will provide greater input by the 
programs and regions, permit long-term planning, allow new and 
changing needs to be readily incorporated and provide for an 
orderly transition out of technical support activities that 
should be phased out. This effort should ensure the elimination 
of redundant, unnecessary activities, so that funds can be 
redirected to higher priorities. This effort makes unnecessary 
the inclusion of transfer authority, included in the House 
bill, to the ``Science and technology'' account for research 
activities requested by the program offices.
    The Committee notes a growing need to manage fish farm 
effluent so that water resources are protected. The University 
of Idaho has proposed a research project, to be supported in 
part by the State and industry, to develop specifically applied 
nutrient containment technologies for fish farm effluent. EPA 
should give strong consideration to funding such aquaculture 
research through its Science to Achieve Results Grant Program.
    The Committee notes the very serious problem of zebra 
mussel infestation in major water bodies in the United States, 
such as Lake Champlain in which the infestation threatens the 
water systems of 25 percent of Vermont's residents. EPA is 
urged to fund research and demonstration projects to control 
zebra mussels in drinking water systems.
    The Committee urges EPA to work with North Dakota State 
University to minimize ground water contamination by developing 
mitigation techniques based on the comparison of satellite-
measured and field-measured data at two identified sites in the 
State.
    The Committee does not recommend bill language requested by 
the administration deriving $9,000,000 of the appropriation 
from the environmental services fund.

                 environmental programs and management

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $1,677,300,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   1,894,329,000
House allowance.........................................   1,704,500,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           1,713,000,000

                          program description

    The Agency's ``Environmental programs and management'' 
account includes the development of environmental standards; 
monitoring and surveillance of pollution conditions; direct 
Federal pollution control planning; technical assistance to 
pollution control agencies and organizations; preparation of 
environmental impact statements; compliance assurance; and 
assistance to Federal agencies in complying with environmental 
standards and insuring that their activities have minimal 
environmental impact.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $1,713,000,000 for environmental 
programs and management, an increase of $10,000,000 above the 
House amount, $35,700,000 above the 1996 level, and a decrease 
of $181,329,000 below the budget request. Factoring the 
transfer of working capital fund resources to the ``Science and 
technology'' account, which formerly had been funded in this 
account, the amount recommended represents an increase of 
approximately $65,000,000 over the 1996 enacted level.
    The Committee has made the following changes from the 
budget request:
  +$2,500,000 for the Southwest Center for Environmental 
        Research and Policy.
  +$3,000,000 for rural water training and technical assistance 
        activities, including $500,000 to bring program funding 
        up to current levels, $1,000,000 for the National 
        Environmental Training Center for small communities, 
        and $1,450,000 for expanding activities of the National 
        Rural Water Association ground water program ($975,000) 
        and the rural community assistance program ($475,000). 
        Through the small flows clearinghouse, the Committee 
        has included $50,000 to establish a regional waste 
        water training center at Vermont Technical College for 
        licensing designers and installers of waste water 
        systems and technology, in view of the importance of 
        improving management of decentralized water and waste 
        water systems.
  +$1,000,000 to continue the onsite waste water treatment 
        technology demonstration program through the small 
        flows clearinghouse. In the administration of this 
        demonstration project, the Committee recommends that 
        special emphasis be placed on efforts to ameliorate the 
        adverse effects of recent floods.
  +$500,000 for the small water system cooperative initiative 
        at Montana State University. This program should be 
        coordinated with other EPA small systems training and 
        technical assistance activities.
  +$320,000 for the regional environmental finance centers, for 
        a total of $1,000,000. These centers help local 
        governments and small businesses meet environmental 
        standards by providing training and analytical 
        services.
  +$300,000 for recycling and reuse technology development at 
        the Iowa Waste Reduction Center. The center helps 
        small- and medium-sized businesses develop ways to 
        reduce their waste and to find uses for materials that 
        are now waste.
  +$1,000,000 for the sediments decontamination technology 
        study, authorized under section 405 of the Water 
        Resources Development Act of 1992, to pilot 
        alternatives to disposal contamination of the ocean and 
        to find beneficial uses for dredged material.
  +$1,000,000 to continue planning efforts for the sewer 
        separation demonstration project for Tanner Creek.
  +$2,000,000 to continue the leaking above ground storage tank 
        demonstration in the State of Alaska.
  +$250,000 for the final year of EPA's demonstration program 
        on the Potomac River's north branch of an acid mine 
        drainage remediation project.
  +$300,000 to continue the evaluation of ground water quality 
        in Missouri where evidence exists of contamination 
        associated with anthropological activities.
  +$1,000,000 for a Missouri watershed initiative cooperative 
        demonstration project with the Food and Agricultural 
        Policy Research Institute [FAPRI] to link economic and 
        environmental data with ambient water quality.
  +$750,000 for the Lake Champlain management plan. The 
        Committee recognizes the myriad of environmental 
        problems facing the Lake Champlain basin and the need 
        for a long-term, multimedia approach to address those 
        problems. The Committee notes the completion of the 
        Lake Champlain basin program's ``Opportunities for 
        Action: An Evolving Plan for the Future of the Lake.'' 
        EPA is a key Federal participant in implementing the 
        plan, and should help establish a coordinated approach 
        to implementing the recommendations contained in the 
        action plan.
  +$1,000,000 for the Lake Hollingsworth, FL, restoration 
        project. This project will demonstrate a new technology 
        to preserve large lakes suffering from eutrophication.
  +$1,000,000 for the city of West Palm Beach to implement an 
        innovative wetlands-based potable water reuse 
        demonstration program. This program will aid in the 
        restoration of the Everglades.
  +$2,000,000 to demonstrate the latest technology in utilizing 
        reclaimed water from a waste water treatment facility. 
        This project will be conducted by the city of Silverton 
        and the Oregon Nurserymen's Garden Foundation, and will 
        establish research, education, and information 
        opportunities relating to the natural treatment of 
        waste water.
  +$500,000 to continue the model coordinated tribal water 
        quality program in Washington State.
  +$400,000 to continue the Maui algal bloom project, including 
        monitoring, data analysis, and development of 
        mitigation strategies.
  +$400,000 for continued support of the Ala Wai Canal 
        watershed improvement demonstration project.
  +$700,000 for the solar aquatic waste water treatment 
        demonstration project in Vermont. The Committee notes 
        that solar aquatic waste water treatment demonstration 
        projects have received funding for several years. 
        Within 6 months of enactment of this act, EPA is to 
        report on what has been achieved, whether stated goals 
        have been met, the viability of applying this 
        technology widely, an assessment of the costs and 
        benefits, and the amount of future Federal funding 
        required.
  +$850,000 for the Nebraska mandates initiative, a pilot 
        effort to help small municipal governments better cope 
        with and understand public health and environmental 
        laws and regulations. A strategic process carried out 
        through a partnership between State officials and local 
        leaders will be used to identify issues of concern, 
        assess risk, and offer technically and financially 
        feasible solutions. The findings of this demonstration 
        should be widely disseminated on a national basis to 
        help small municipalities across the county.
  +$525,000 for an early childhood initiative in environmental 
        education.
  +$1,000,000 to help establish an effective long-term 
        watershed protection program to ensure the provision of 
        safe drinking water for New York City, including 
        monitoring, surveillance, and research activities. This 
        initiative supports the recently established 
        intergovernmental agreement between upstate watershed 
        communities, the State of New York, New York City, 
        environmental organizations, and EPA. This agreement 
        promotes and is consistent with the principles of 
        pollution prevention that EPA considers a high 
        priority.
  +$250,000 for the Nature Conservancy of Alaska for protection 
        of the Kenai River watershed, including assisting the 
        local community in their efforts to establish a land 
        trust to protect this crucial fisheries resource.
  +$1,500,000 for waste water training grants under 104(g) of 
        the Clean Water Act.
  +$200,000 to continue the cleanup of Five Island Lake.
  +$500,000 for the Alabama Department of Environmental 
        Management to conduct a study on innovations in sewer 
        system development and operation for the purpose of 
        determining the feasibility of developing a cost-
        effective, innovative sewer system for the community of 
        Smith Station located in Lee County, AL.
  +$100,000 for a demonstration project on the use of oysters 
        to improve water quality in Chesapeake Bay tributaries 
        in Maryland.
  +$1,000,000 for a small business compliance demonstration 
        project, described later in this section.
  -$48,000,000 from the increase requested for the climate 
        change action plan. The amount recommended is the same 
        as the 1996 level.
  -$7,000,000 from the increase requested for the Montreal 
        Protocol facilitation fund, leaving $12,000,000, the 
        same as the 1996 level.
  -$43,500,000 from the environmental technology initiative. 
        Funds are provided for technology verification 
        activities in the ``Science and technology'' account. 
        The Committee does not intend that the design for the 
        environment [DfE] initiative, a program which preceded 
        the environmental technology initiative, be treated as 
        part of the ETI program and, therefore, is not subject 
        to the ETI reduction.
  -$5,000,000 from the new sustainable development challenge 
        grant program, leaving $5,000,000 for this program.
  -$2,000,000 from the national service initiative.
  -$1,000,000 from GLOBE.
  -$500,000 from the Gulf of Mexico program. This reduction is 
        taken in connection with a recent inspector general 
        audit which identified questionable actions by the Gulf 
        of Mexico Program Office related to a grant award, 
        including unallowable costs and excessive 
        administrative costs.
  -$37,000,000 from the requested increase for new hires, 
        subject to normal reprogramming guidelines.
  -$63,174,000 as a general reduction, subject to normal 
        reprogramming requirements. Given that the final fiscal 
        year 1996 appropriation for EPA was enacted late in the 
        year, it is expected there will be a higher than normal 
        amount of carryover funds in this account. Such 
        carryover will ease the burden of absorbing this 
        general reduction.
    Concerns have been expressed in the past about the growth 
of EPA's green programs and questions have been raised as to 
whether it is appropriate for the Federal Government to be in 
the business of helping corporations improve their 
profitability. In the 1996 conference report on the VA-HUD 
appropriations legislation, EPA was directed to provide a 
report on the feasibility of implementing a fee to recover all 
reasonable costs incurred by EPA for assistance rendered 
businesses in its energy efficiency and energy supply program. 
To date, EPA has failed to submit this report. EPA is directed 
to respond to this requirement in a timely manner, no later 
than 30 days after enactment of this act.
    The Committee's concerns with the green programs have been 
amplified by a recent inspector general report identifying 
waste and mismanagement in the green lights program. In 
particular, the inspector general found ``the program was more 
costly than necessary because EPA authorized the contractor to 
perform questionable work without analyzing its cost 
effectiveness or necessity.'' The inspector general also found 
that EPA's measures of success of this program were deceiving. 
In particular, ``the agency emphasized the number and 
prominence of its participants without revealing that many had 
made little or no progress in the program.'' If the agency 
expects future congressional support for this program, EPA 
should report within 30 days on its plans to remedy these 
serious shortcomings.
    The Committee supports the administration's request for the 
Great Waters Program, the Chesapeake Bay program, the south 
Florida initiative (restoration of the Everglades), and the 
National Estuary Program, including full funding of the 
Sarasota Bay project. The Committee urges EPA to provide no 
less than 1996 funding level for the Great Lakes National 
Program Office.
    The Committee urges EPA to support the efforts of the 
Onondaga Lake Management Conference to complete and implement a 
comprehensive restoration plan for the Onondaga Lake.
    The Committee urges EPA's continued support for 
implementation of the Long Island Sound comprehensive 
conservation and management plan.
    Through EPA's compliance assistance program, EPA should 
consider supporting a compliance assistance center for painting 
and coating. Painting and coating are integral parts of many 
small business operations, and often are subject to EPA 
regulations concerning air emissions, hazardous waste, solid 
waste, and waste water. Given that many small businesses have 
considerable difficulty dealing with these regulatory 
requirements, these is a compelling need for compliance 
assistance.
    The Committee recognizes that the protection of the U.S. 
environment depends in part on the environmental protection 
efforts of other countries, and, therefore, EPA's international 
activities are an important element to fulfilling the agency's 
central mission. The Committee encourages the integration of 
EPA's international goals more coherently into its principal 
mission and objectives, and asks that EPA submit to the 
Committee, no later than March 1, 1997, a strategic plan for 
strengthening its international program. This plan should 
address the integration of the international program into EPA's 
primary objectives, the prioritization of international 
activities, the role of other Federal agencies in international 
environmental activities and their relationship with EPA's 
Office of International Activities, and the value to the 
American people of EPA's international environment program.
    The Committee supports EPA's role in working with 
stakeholders in developing voluntary incentive-based approaches 
for mitigating nonpoint source pollution. The Committee urges 
EPA to actively work with USDA agencies, through the National 
Agroforestry Center at Lincoln, NE, to develop and apply 
agroforestry technologies in sustainable agriculture and 
sustainable community systems. Agroforestry, particularly when 
applied to riparian buffer systems and used in conjunction with 
other best management practices such as soil conservation 
measures and integrated crop (nutrient and pest) management, 
can help support water quality improvement and diversity though 
a community-based watershed protection approach.
    The Committee urges EPA to maintain the water quality 
testing program along the New Jersey and New York shorelines. 
The Federal program involves locating and removing visible 
floatables in the water and monitoring and surveying ocean 
water quality.
    The Committee notes that air deposition can be a 
significant contributor to pollution and eutrophication of 
waters in the Eastern United States. EPA has requested 
$1,100,000 to investigate the adverse effects of atmospheric 
pollution on the Nation's water quality, including modeling 
techniques to coincide with existing water quality models for 
the Chesapeake Bay. The Committee supports the full request for 
this activity.
    The Committee notes a proposal by the South Shore 
Transportation Management Association and Tahoe Regional 
Planning Agency to create a coordinated transit system which 
would result in reduced air pollution from mobile sources 
through the deployment of automatic vehicle location [ALV], 
computer-aided demand response dispatching [CAD] and advanced 
traveler information [ATI] strategies. EPA is urged to review 
such a proposal carefully and to work cooperatively with 
interested parties, including the Department of Transportation, 
in furthering this project.
    The Committee is concerned that the wood preserving 
industry is required to report, document, and manage as 
hazardous waste, water that is collected, contained and 
returned to the wood preserving process, and urges EPA to 
consider expeditiously promulgating a wastewater exclusion 
under RCRA which would eliminate duplicative and unnecessary 
regulation of wastewater in the wood preserving process.
    The Committee understands that EPA is exploring all options 
to meet U.S. international obligations in response to the April 
29, 1996, ruling by the appellate body of the World Trade 
Organization [WTO] that EPA's establishment of different 
requirements for imported and domestically produced gasoline is 
discriminatory. Fiscal year 1995 and fiscal year 1996 
appropriations language for the Environmental Protection Agency 
prohibited EPA from using funds to implement the requirement 
proposed as regulation of fuels and fuel additives: Individual 
foreign refinery baseline requirements for reformulated 
gasoline. In lieu of the previous language, the Committee 
directs EPA to involve actively and consistently all interested 
environmental, industry, and other groups in the decisionmaking 
process leading up to EPA's final decision in this matter. 
Furthermore, the Committee expects that any decision by EPA 
will be consistent with the Clean Air Act and EPA's commitment 
to fully protect public health and the environment. In this 
regard, the Committee requests that the Environmental 
Protection Agency report back to the Committee quarterly on 
this issue and prior to promulgating, reinstating, or modifying 
any rule in response to the WTO ruling.
    The Committee remains concerned about the balancing of 
costs and benefits for the proposed cluster rule for pulp and 
paper. The Committee urges EPA to address appropriately 
pollutants emitted at only de minimis levels, such as metals 
from pulping combustion sources, by using its existing 
authority to establish a de minimis exemption for such 
pollutants, or by establishing an emission threshold or level 
of applicability which would achieve a similar result. The 
Committee also encourages EPA to provide for the development of 
flexible, mill-specific best management practices plans in the 
effluent guidelines portion of the rule.
    The Committee expects EPA to allocate no less than $300,000 
to the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management 
[NESCAUM], a nonprofit association of State air pollution 
control agencies representing the six New England States, New 
York, and New Jersey, which provides technical assistance and 
policy guidance to its member States.
    The Committee is supportive of an effort by the Water 
Environment Research Foundation, the National Rural Electric 
Cooperative Association, the Electric Power Research Institute, 
the Coalition for Alternative Wastewater Treatment, the 
Consortium of Institutes for Decentralized Wastewater 
Treatment, and others to create a national decentralized water 
resources capacity development project. EPA should provide 
assistance and support to this important effort which will 
coordinate the Nation's decentralized treatment leadership in 
developing high-quality methods and approaches.
    The Administrator is directed to spend $1,000,000 to 
undertake a demonstration implementing section 215 of the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 to improve 
the compliance rates of selected small business sectors in 
selected States and to reduce regulatory compliance costs to 
the sector and regulatory agencies, by clarifying the 
environmental regulations applicable to the sector and 
simplifying the process for permit application through 
automating and standardizing application review.
    The Administrator, in cooperation with States and small 
business associations, shall select projects for this 
demonstration after considering the number, size, and 
geographic concentration of small businesses that make up the 
sector and the complexity of Federal and State regulatory 
requirements applicable to the sector. Under the oversight of 
experienced regulatory personnel, the demonstration shall 
develop integrated compliance assistance packets. Such packets 
shall be designed to include for the selected sector and State: 
a comprehensive guide to the applicable environmental rules and 
actions that businesses in the sector can take to comply with 
such rules, including examples of proper reporting techniques 
and forms; a simplified permit application or substitute for a 
permit identifying the most likely pollutant sources, control 
devices, and the permitting conditions most likely to remedy 
any identified noncompliance situations; and a video 
presentation visually describing compliant and noncompliant 
operations with respect to environmental laws.
    The Committee continues to support the implementation of 
recommendations made by the National Academy of Public 
Administration in their 1995 report to the Congress, ``Setting 
Priorities, Getting Results: A New Direction for EPA.'' 
Implementation of these recommendations are intended to 
maximize the use of EPA's resources by ensuring a risk-based 
allocation of resources. In response to NAPA's recommendations, 
EPA plans to establish a new office to link planning, 
budgeting, and accountability. This effort is a critical 
component to begin meeting NAPA's recommendations, and to 
ensure that funding for programs is based on the relative risk 
of environmental problems and program results in protecting 
human health and the environment. The agency is to move 
expeditiously to establish this office, and provide an 
appropriate balance among the planning, budgeting, and 
accountability functions.
    The ability to compare programs across the spectrum of 
media on the basis of risk, and to analyze program 
effectiveness based on impacts to the environment, are vital 
tools currently lacking within EPA. In establishing the new PBA 
system, addressing this deficiency is a priority. The Committee 
notes the General Accounting Office has been tasked with 
assessing EPA's progress in establishing a comprehensive 
planning, budgeting, and accountability system.
    The Committee has approved the budget request of 
$30,000,000 for a strategic information resources management 
[IRM] initiative. This program includes a one-stop reporting 
initiative which will consolidate EPA program reporting 
requirements into one multimedia reporting requirement which 
will reduce the reporting burdens for regulated industries and 
States.
    The Committee continues to support a directive to the 
Administrator contained in the conference agreement 
accompanying the fiscal year 1996 VA-HUD bill, requiring EPA to 
enter into an arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences 
to investigate and report on the scientific basis for EPA's 
recommendations relative to indoor radon and other naturally 
occurring radioactive materials. EPA is to provide a progress 
report to the Committee within 90 days of enactment of this 
act.
    The Committee directs the agency to provide State pesticide 
laboratories assistance with standards distribution, methods 
development, training, and technical support at levels of 
staffing and funding previously allocated for these activities 
by the National Enforcement Investigations Center.
    The Committee is aware of the compelling water treatment 
needs in the city of Kodiak, AK, and directs the agency to work 
with the city to develop a plan to ensure compliance with water 
quality standards and to lift the current moratorium on new 
sewer hookups.
    The Committee is supportive of EPA's planned extension to 
the release date of a report on mercury emissions from 
industrial sources, required by the Clean Air Act amendments, 
in order to incorporate newly available scientific information. 
The report should be reviewed comprehensively by the Science 
Advisory Board prior to publication. In addition, the Committee 
believes it appropriate to extend the release date of the 
report on the health effects of hazardous air pollutants from 
electric utility steam generating units, mandated by the Clean 
Air Act amendments, to ensure the best available scientific 
data on mercury emissions can be incorporated in that report as 
well.
    The Committee does not recommend bill language proposed by 
the administration which would derive $1,000,000 of the 
appropriation from the environmental services fund.

                      office of inspector general

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $40,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      42,744,000
House allowance.........................................      40,077,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              40,077,000

                          program description

    The Office of Inspector General provides EPA audit and 
investigative functions to identify and recommend corrective 
actions of management, program, and administrative deficiencies 
which create conditions for existing or potential instances of 
fraud, waste, and mismanagement.
    Trust fund resources are transferred to this account 
directly from the hazardous substance Superfund and leaking 
underground storage tank trust funds.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $40,077,000 for the Office of 
Inspector General, a reduction of $2,667,000 below the budget 
request and the same as the House amount. The reduction is a 
general reduction, subject to normal reprogramming guidelines. 
The appropriation includes $28,500,000 from the general fund in 
this account, $11,000,000 from the Superfund trust fund, and 
$577,000 from the LUST trust fund. The trust fund resources 
will be transferred to the inspector general ``General fund'' 
account with an expenditure transfer.

                        buildings and facilities

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $110,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     209,220,000
House allowance.........................................     107,220,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              27,220,000

                          program description

    The appropriation for buildings and facilities at EPA 
covers the necessary major repairs and improvements to existing 
installations which are used by the Agency. This appropriation 
also covers new construction projects when appropriate.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $27,220,000 for buildings and 
facilities. The decrease of $182,000,000 below the request 
reflects the Committee's recommendation not to fund the new 
Research Triangle Park [RTP] laboratory project. The Committee 
does not recommend inclusion of House bill language authorizing 
the expenditure of funds for the RTP project.

                     hazardous substance superfund

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $1,313,400,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   1,394,245,000
House allowance........................................\1\ 1,340,200,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,394,245,000

\1\ Does not include $861,000,000 in contingency funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    On October 17, 1986, Congress amended the Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 
[CERCLA] through the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization 
Act of 1986 [SARA]. SARA reauthorized and expanded the 
hazardous substance Superfund to address the problems of 
uncontrolled hazardous waste sites and spills. Specifically, 
the legislation mandates that EPA: (1) provide emergency 
response to hazardous waste spills; (2) take emergency action 
at hazardous waste sites that pose an imminent hazard to public 
health or environmentally sensitive ecosystems; (3) engage in 
long-term planning, remedial design, and construction to clean 
up hazardous waste sites where no financially viable 
responsible party can be found; (4) take enforcement actions to 
require responsible private and Federal parties to clean up 
hazardous waste sites; and (5) take enforcement actions to 
recover costs where the fund has been used for cleanup.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of 
$1,394,245,000 for Superfund. This represents an increase of 
$80,845,000 above the current budget and $54,045,000 above the 
House. The amount provided includes $250,000,000 from general 
revenues, as authorized, and the balance from the trust fund.
    The Committee has made the following changes to the budget 
request:
  +$6,000,000 for the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 
        Registry, for a total of $64,000,000. Of this amount, 
        no less than the 1996 amount is included for the Great 
        Lakes fish consumption study and $1,000,000 is included 
        for the Tom's River Cancer Cluster study.
  +$5,000,000 for the National Institute of Environmental 
        Health Sciences Research program.
  -$8,000,000 from the proposed transfer of $43,000,000 to the 
        ``Science and technology'' account for Superfund 
        research.
  -$3,000,000 from management and support costs.
    The amount recommended by the Committee for fiscal year 
1997 includes the full budget request, $900,000,000, for 
response action (site cleanup activities). EPA's request is 
less than what the agency estimates will be required to begin 
cleanup activities at all fund-lead new construction starts 
anticipated to be ready in fiscal year 1997. However, it is 
expected that EPA will be utilizing its recently finalized 
risk-based site prioritization methodology to ensure those 
sites posing the most significant threats to human health and 
the environment are addressed first. While the Committee 
supports the concept of a risk-based prioritization model, such 
a tool should have been developed long ago to ensure the most 
effective allocation of Superfund resources.
    The Committee notes that due to the maturation of the 
Superfund program and the consequent growth in the number of 
sites entering the resource-intensive construction phase of the 
Superfund pipeline, resource requirements for individual sites 
have increased. This accounts for the difficulty in immediately 
providing funds for all sites as soon as they enter the 
construction phase of the pipeline.
    The Committee notes that approximately $110,500,000 was 
carried over from fiscal year 1995 into fiscal year 1996 in the 
Superfund program, despite agency claims that program funding 
was inadequate. Of this amount, $86,800,000 was applied to the 
response action function. Should there be carryover in fiscal 
year 1997, all such funds should be applied to response 
actions.
    The Committee is disturbed by EPA's promotion of misleading 
information within the last year regarding the impacts 
associated with the Superfund budget as recommended by the 
Congress in the original fiscal year 1996 appropriations bill, 
vetoed by the President. While statements were made that 68 
sites were shut down due to budget cuts, in fact all of those 
sites even under the President's own original budget request 
would not have been funded. The President visited one such 
site, the Industrial Latex site in Wallington, NJ, which even 
under the President's own budget request, would not have been 
funded in 1996. The list of 68 sites represented all fund-lead 
sites which potentially would be ready to go to construction 
during fiscal year 1996. Approximately 40 percent of the sites 
are not anticipated to be ready for construction until the 
fourth quarter of the fiscal year, and slippage is common. 
Moreover, none of the sites in question posed immediate threats 
to human health. EPA should discontinue the practice of 
providing misleading information to Congress and the public.
    The Committee further notes that the agency's failure to 
implement a risk-based prioritization methodology in a timely 
manner is in part responsible for delays in the Superfund 
cleanup program.
    Finally, the Committee notes that the final 1996 enacted 
budget for Superfund represented an increase of approximately 
$100,000,000 over the prior year.
    The Committee supports the full budget request for the 
Brownfields redevelopment program, an increase of $25,000,000 
over the current level. EPA is to consider whether Brownfields 
should be expanded to include developing old industrial sites 
to create green space. Salt Lake County and Sandy City, UT, are 
working together to redevelop the old Sandy landfill, into a 
recreational park facility. EPA is directed to provide an 
analysis to the Committee within 60 days as to whether such a 
project should be included in the Brownfields program, given 
its goal of redevelopment.
    EPA is further directed to provide an analysis to the 
Committee within 60 days as to whether the Brownfields project 
proposed for the former LTV site in Pittsburgh, PA, which would 
be converted into a multiuse site, should be included in the 
Brownfields program, given its goal of redevelopment.
    The city of Seattle and Seattle Public School District are 
working together to rehabilitate and restore the former Colman 
School to create a community facility and African-American 
heritage museum. EPA is to consider whether this project should 
be included in the Brownfields redevelopment program. The 
project would involve an evaluation of various contaminants 
including asbestos, soil contamination, and possible ground 
water contamination at the former Colman School.
    The Committee urges EPA and the agencies which support the 
Superfund program, particularly NIEHS and ATSDR, to improve 
cooperation and communication between the parties. EPA and 
these agencies are to work together to resolve disagreements to 
ensure that their mutual goal of protecting human health and 
the environment can be met in the most effective way possible.
    The Committee notes the compelling needs associated with 
the Agriculture Street landfill site in New Orleans, LA, and 
urges EPA to address remediation needs at this site 
expeditiously and provide needed resources to meet these 
requirements.
    Bill language has been included, as in the fiscal year 1996 
appropriation, delaying the availability for obligation of 
$100,000,000 until September 1, 1997. This is not expected to 
have an adverse programmatic impact.
    The Committee has not recommended bill language creating a 
Superfund contingency reserve fund in view of the fact that the 
committee of jurisdiction has not reported legislation 
reauthorizing Superfund at this time. However, the Committee 
fully supports the full funding for Superfund contained in the 
concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1997, 
which, including the reserve fund, totals $2,200,000,000. The 
Committee expects to approve expeditiously, legislation which 
would appropriate the reserve funds once authorizing 
legislation is enacted.
    House bill language requiring the expenditure of $1,200,000 
for an ATSDR health effects study of the Tom's River Cancer 
Cluster has been deleted. However, the Committee has 
recommended $1,000,000 for this study.

              leaking underground storage tank trust fund

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $45,827,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      67,119,000
House allowance.........................................      66,500,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              60,000,000

                          program description

    The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorizations Act of 1986 
[SARA] established the leaking underground storage tank [LUST] 
trust fund to conduct corrective actions for releases from 
leaking underground storage tanks containing petroleum and 
other hazardous substances. EPA implements the LUST program 
through State cooperative agreement grants which enable States 
to conduct corrective actions to protect human health and the 
environment, and through non-State entities including Indian 
tribes under section 8001 of RCRA. The trust fund is also used 
to enforce responsible parties to finance corrective actions 
and to recover expended funds used to clean up abandoned tanks.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends a budget of $60,000,000 for the 
Leaking Underground Storage Tank Program, an increase of 
$14,173,000 over the 1996 enacted level. The Committee 
recognizes the importance of this program in protecting the 
Nation's ground water resources. Approximately 85 percent of 
the funds are allocated directly to the States to address 
leaking underground storage tanks.
    The Committee recommends bill language, as in the House, 
which limits administrative expenses to $7,000,000.

                           oilspill response

                     (including transfer of funds)

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $15,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      15,305,000
House allowance.........................................      15,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              15,000,000

                          program description

    This appropriation, authorized by the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act of 1987 and amended by the Oil Pollution 
Act of 1990, provides funds for preventing and responding to 
releases of oil and other petroleum products in navigable 
waterways. EPA is responsible for: directing all cleanup and 
removal activities posing a threat to public health and the 
environment; conducting inspections, including compelling 
responsible parties to undertake cleanup actions; reviewing 
containment plans at facilities; reviewing area contingency 
plans; pursuing cost recovery of fund-financed cleanups; and 
conducting research of oil cleanup techniques. Funds are 
provided through the oilspill liability trust fund established 
by the Oil Pollution Act and managed by the Coast Guard.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $15,000,000 for the oilspill 
response trust fund, a reduction of $305,000 below the request 
and the same as the current level and the House amount. The 
Committee included bill language limiting administrative 
expenses to $8,000,000.

                   state and tribal ASSISTANCE grants

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $2,813,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   2,852,207,000
House allowance.........................................   2,768,207,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           2,815,207,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The ``State and tribal assistance grants'' account funds 
grants to support the State revolving fund programs; State, 
tribal, regional, and local environmental programs; and special 
projects to address critical waste water treatment needs. The 
funds provided in this account, exclusive of the funds for the 
SRF and the special waste water treatment projects, may be used 
by the Agency to enter into performance partnerships with 
States and tribes rather than media-specific categorical 
program grants, if requested by the States and tribes.
    This account funds the following infrastructure grant 
programs: State revolving funds; United States-Mexico Border 
Program; colonias projects; and Alaska Native villages.
    It also contains the following environmental grants, State/
tribal program grants, and assistance and capacity building 
grants: (1) Nonpoint source (sec. 319 of the Federal Water 
Pollution Control Act); (2) water quality cooperative 
agreements (sec. 104(b)(3) of FWPCA; (3) public water system 
supervision; (4) air resource assistance to State, local, and 
tribal governments (sec. 105 of the Clean Air Act); (5) radon 
State grants; (6) control agency resource supplementation (sec. 
106 of the FWPCA); (7) wetlands program implementation; (8) 
underground injection control; (9) Pesticides Program 
implementation; (10) lead grants; (11) hazardous waste 
financial assistance; (12) pesticides enforcement grants; (13) 
pollution prevention; (14) toxic substances enforcement grants; 
(15) Indians general assistance grants; and, (16) underground 
storage tanks.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,815,207,000 
for State and tribal assistance grants. This is an increase of 
$2,207,000 over the 1996 enacted level, $47,000,000 above the 
House amount, and a decrease of $37,000,000 below the 
administration request. The decrease is attributable to the 
Committee's recommendation not to fund site-specific wastewater 
earmarks. Given the increasing responsibility of State and 
local governments in implementing environmental programs, 
coupled with budget shortfalls at the State and local level, 
EPA State grant funding is critical. Therefore, the Committee 
has provided significant increases to EPA programs directly 
benefiting State activities. The recommendation includes the 
following programs:
    $1,426,000,000 for clean water State revolving funds, an 
increase of $76,000,000 over the budget request and the House 
amount, and $28,000,000 over the 1996 level.
    $550,000,000 for drinking water State revolving funds, the 
same as the budget request, and an increase of $100,000,000 
over the House amount and $50,000,000 over the 1996 level.
    $100,000,000 for architectural, engineering, design, and 
construction-related activities for high-priority water and 
wastewater facilities in communities near the United States-
Mexico border, including large and small cities, towns and 
rural areas. This amount is the same as the budget request, the 
House amount, and the 1996 level.
    $50,000,000 for Colonias projects in Texas, the same as the 
budget request, the House amount, and the 1996 level.
    $15,000,000 for Alaska rural and native villages, the same 
as the budget request, the House amount, and the 1996 level.
    $674,207,000 for State grants, the same as the budget 
request and the House amount, and an increase of $16,000,000 
over the 1996 level. These funds may be provided to States as 
performance partnership block grants. Within the total amount 
provided for such State grants, EPA is not required to notify 
the Committee of reprogrammings based on States and tribes 
applying for performance partnership grants. This effectuates 
States' abilities to use funds to best meet their environmental 
priorities.
    The Committee does not recommend funding for the 
administration's request for grants for selected localities, 
including Boston Harbor (-$100,000,000), New Orleans 
(-$10,000,000), and Bristol County (-$3,000,000). Such earmarks 
do not represent an equitable distribution of State and tribal 
assistance grant funds, and are provided at the expense of the 
State revolving funds, which are allocated to every State on 
the basis of need.
    EPA, in cooperation with the Assistant Secretary of the 
Army for Civil Works, shall report to the Committee within 6 
months of enactment of this act, as to the capabilities of the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to work with EPA to address rural 
sanitation and water supply problems in Alaska under the Corps' 
existing authorities including the Work for Others Program. 
This report shall include a recommendation addressing the cost 
effectiveness and advisability of creating a working 
partnership between the Corps of Engineers, EPA, and the State 
of Alaska to address rural sanitation and water supply 
problems.
    The Committee commends EPA's public/private partnership 
efforts in the area of waste water treatment facilities and 
notes that more and more State and local governments are 
beginning to pursue this option. The Committee encourages EPA 
to continue to provide leadership in this area and work with 
communities to enable the use of the public/private partnership 
approach wherever appropriate and feasible. In addition, the 
Committee expects EPA to work with the other agencies and 
departments involved to ensure swift approval of public/private 
partnership transactions when such approvals are required. 
Finally, the Committee expects EPA to evaluate its own 
regulations to ensure they do not impede public/private 
partnerships and to notify the appropriate committees of 
Congress of those situations that require legislative action.
    The Committee notes the very compelling needs for adequate 
drinking water systems in rural areas, such as those in Lee, 
Wise, and Scott Counties in Virginia. It is expected that the 
new State revolving fund for drinking water infrastructure will 
help meet the needs of small and rural communities in 
developing a viable public water system. Upon enactment of 
drinking water legislation, EPA is to move expeditiously to 
award SRF funds to States so that such needs can be met as soon 
as possible.
    The Committee is aware of an audit dispute between the EPA 
and the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission [MWMC], 
an intergovernmental agency organized by the cities of Eugene 
and Springfield and Lane County, OR. The Committee expects the 
agency to follow the EPA's 1981 affirmative management decision 
which was made to reduce the project's administrative costs.
    The Committee recommends a modification to House bill 
language authorizing the expenditure of funds for Alaska rural 
and native villages to include drinking water infrastructure as 
well as waste water.
    As in the House, bill language has been included 
stipulating that if no drinking water State revolving fund 
legislation is enacted by June 1, 1997, the drinking water SRF 
funds shall be made available immediately for clean water State 
revolving funds.
    The Committee recommends bill language, proposed by the 
administration, authorizing the Administrator to make grants to 
States, from funds available for obligation in the State under 
title II of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, to 
administer and closeout the State's construction grants 
program. This provision is needed in many States due to the 
appropriation of nearly $800,000,000 since 1991 for wastewater 
grant projects and in view of the expiration of the 205(g) 
reserve for such management activities.
    The Committee, without prejudice, does not recommend bill 
language, proposed by the administration, allowing the merging 
of drinking water and wastewater State revolving funds. This 
issue should be considered after enactment of drinking water 
legislation.

                          Working Capital Fund

    The Committee has included bill language, as in the House, 
establishing a pilot working capital fund, as authorized by 
section 403 of Public Law 103-356. The activities to be 
included in EPA's working capital fund in fiscal year 1997 are 
the National Data Processing Division computer operations at 
Research Triangle Park and postage. These administrative 
services will be provided to users on a fee-for-service basis. 
These funds will be available without fiscal year limitation to 
continue operations and to replace capital equipment. Amounts 
in excess of 4 percent of the total annual income to the fund 
must be returned to the Treasury no later than 30 days after 
the end of each fiscal year. Estimated operating expenses for 
fiscal year 1997 are approximately $101,500,000.
    The Committee directs EPA to provide a quarterly status 
report on the working capital fund.

                        Administrative Provision

    The Committee has not included House bill language 
authorizing the transfer of funds to the ``Science and 
technology'' account from other EPA accounts for necessary 
research activities. The Committee does not believe such 
transfer authority is necessary, and would violate the 
integrity of the appropriation account structure.

                   Executive Office of the President

                Office of Science and Technology Policy

Appropriations, 1996....................................      $4,981,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................       4,932,000
House allowance.........................................       4,932,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               4,932,000

                          program description

    The Office of Science and Technology Policy [OSTP] was 
created by the National Science and Technology Policy, 
Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-238) 
and coordinates science and technology policy for the White 
House. OSTP provides authoritative scientific and technological 
information, analysis, and advice for the President, for the 
executive branch, and for Congress; participates in 
formulation, coordination, and implementation of national and 
international policies and programs that involve science and 
technology; maintains and promotes the health and vitality of 
the U.S. science and technology infrastructure; and coordinates 
research and development efforts of the Federal Government to 
maximize the return on the public's investment in science and 
technology and to ensure Federal resources are used efficiently 
and appropriately.
    OSTP provides support for the National Science and 
Technology Council [NSTC].

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,932,000 for 
the Office of Science and Technology Policy. This amount is the 
same as the budget request and the House allowance.

  Council on Environmental Quality and Office of Environmental Quality

Appropriations, 1996....................................      $2,150,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................       2,436,000
House allowance.........................................       2,250,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               2,436,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Council on Environmental Quality/Office of 
Environmental Quality was established by the National 
Environmental Policy Act and the Environmental Quality 
Improvement Act of 1970. The Council serves as a source of 
environmental expertise and policy analysis for the White 
House, Executive Office of the President agencies, and other 
Federal agencies. CEQ promulgates regulations binding on all 
Federal agencies to implement the procedural provisions of the 
National Environmental Policy Act and resolves interagency 
environmental disputes informally and through issuance of 
findings and recommendations.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee has provided $2,436,000 for the Council on 
Environmental Quality, the same as the request, and an increase 
of $186,000 above the House and $286,000 above the current 
level.

                  Federal Emergency Management Agency

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $678,610,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     780,049,000
House allowance........................................\1\ 1,591,316,000
Committee recommendation...............................\1\ 1,780,189,000

\1\ Includes the restoration of $1,000,000,000 in previously rescinded 
disaster relief funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          general description

    FEMA is responsible for coordinating Federal efforts to 
reduce the loss of life and property through a comprehensive 
risk-based, all hazards emergency management program of 
mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee has provided a total of $1,780,189,000 for 
the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The amount provided 
includes the restoration of $1,000,000,000 in previously 
rescinded disaster relief funds. The amount recommended, 
excluding the restoration of disaster relief funds, is an 
increase of $140,000 above the administration's request.
    The Committee's approval of the full budget request for 
FEMA reflects its support for this agency and the recognition 
of the changes FEMA has made over the past several years to 
improve preparedness for and responsiveness to major disasters.
    Notwithstanding this support, the Committee continues to 
have concerns with respect to the disaster relief fund and the 
current inadequacy of financial, regulatory, and statutory 
controls over this multibillion dollar fund. Addressing this 
shortcoming should be the agency's highest management priority.

                            disaster relief

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $222,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     320,000,000
House allowance.........................................   1,120,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           1,320,000,000

                          program description

    Federal disaster assistance is a nationwide program 
operated pursuant to the Stafford Act. FEMA is authorized to 
provide Federal assistance to supplement the efforts and 
resources of State and local governments in response to major 
disasters and emergencies. Funds may be made available directly 
to a State or to other Federal agencies as reimbursement of 
expenditures in disaster relief work performed under this 
authority. Funds and other assistance may also be made 
available to individuals, families, and businesses for disaster 
related needs and expenses. In addition, a variety of other 
Federal assistance is coordinated under this program.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $1,320,000,000 for FEMA disaster 
relief, an increase of $200,000,000 above the House. This 
includes the regular appropriation of $320,000,000 requested by 
the administration, and the restoration of $1,000,000,000 in 
funds rescinded in the Omnibus Consolidated Rescissions and 
Appropriations Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-134). As in the 
House, bill language has been included delaying the 
availability of these funds for obligation until September 30, 
1997.
    The Committee continues to be concerned with the increasing 
cost of disaster relief. At a hearing before the VA, HUD, and 
Independent Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee earlier this 
year, the FEMA Director stated that FEMA will provide by 
October 1, 1996, its plans for instituting additional controls 
on disaster relief expenditures, including stronger and clearer 
criteria for disaster declarations, improved financial 
management practices, reducing the level of appeals, and 
ensuring consistent and appropriate eligibility determinations. 
The Committee expects the agency will submit its proposal, 
including any necessary legislative changes, to the Congress by 
October 1, 1996.
    The Committee recognizes that FEMA's urban search and 
rescue [USAR] system is a critical resource for response 
operations following catastrophic events, and notes its 
continuing concern relating to the geographic distribution of 
the teams. In particular, there is no team in the central 
United States, while the Midwest is an area subject to very 
real threats including flooding, tornadoes, and threats from 
the New Madrid earthquake fault. Given the importance of 
ensuring adequate operational search and rescue capacity, and 
the fact that vacancies currently exist, FEMA is to award by 
the beginning of fiscal year 1997, up to five new teams. These 
teams should be selected on the basis of readiness to enter the 
system, State and local support, geographic location, and other 
factors traditionally considered by FEMA. The Committee notes a 
pending proposal from the Boone County, MO, Fire District and 
directs FEMA to act expeditiously to review and evaluate this 
team's capabilities.
    The Committee recognizes the important services provided to 
victims of the Miller's Reach fire in Alaska by Alaska Legal 
Services, and the substantial increase in caseload Alaska Legal 
Services has experienced as a result of the fire. FEMA is urged 
to provide assistance and work with the Legal Services 
Corporation to ensure Alaska Legal Services can continue to 
meet the needs of disaster victims.

            disaster assistance direct loan program account

                      (limitation on direct loans)

                            STATE SHARE LOAN

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Program     Administrative
                                              account        expenses   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996....................      $2,155,000         $95,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................       1,385,000         548,000
House allowance.........................       1,385,000         548,000
Committee recommendation................       1,385,000         548,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Under the State Share Loan Program, FEMA may lend or 
advance to an eligible applicant or State the portion of 
assistance for which the applicant is responsible under cost-
sharing provisions of the Stafford Act. To be deemed eligible, 
the Governor must demonstrate, where damage is overwhelming and 
severe, that the State is unable to assume its financial 
responsibility to meet the cost share.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    For the State Share Loan Program, the Committee has 
provided $25,000,000 in loan authority and $548,000 in 
administrative expenses. For the cost of subsidizing the 
appropriation, the bill includes $1,385,000.

                         salaries and expenses

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $168,900,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     166,733,000
House allowance.........................................     168,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                             166,733,000

                          program description

    The salaries and expenses appropriation comprises two 
activities:
    Program support.--This activity provides for staff and 
supporting resources to administer the Agency's various 
programs at the headquarters, field, and regional levels. The 
salaries and expenses for flood plain management under 
mitigation programs and flood insurance operations are provided 
by transfer from the national flood insurance fund.
    Executive direction.--This activity provides staff and 
supporting resources for the general management and 
administration of the Agency in legal affairs, congressional 
and public affairs, personnel, and financial management.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request, $166,733,000, 
for FEMA salaries and expenses. This is $1,267,000 less than 
the House amount. The Committee notes the reduction of 
$2,167,000 from the 1996 level is attributable primarily to the 
completion of short initiatives in 1996 such as support for the 
Summer Olympics, enhancements to the financial management 
system, and relocation of the region IV office.

                    office of the inspector general

Appropriations, 1996....................................      $4,673,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................       4,533,000
House allowance.........................................       4,533,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               4,673,000

                          program description

    The Office of the Inspector General [OIG] conducts, 
supervises, and coordinates all audits, inspections, and 
investigations. The OIG supervises and coordinates other 
activities in the Agency and between the Agency and other 
Federal, State, and local government agencies whose purposes 
are to: (a) promote economy and efficiency; (b) prevent and 
detect fraud and mismanagement; and (c) identify and prosecute 
people involved in fraud or mismanagement.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $4,673,000 for the Office of the 
Inspector General, the same amount as the enacted level, and an 
increase of $140,000 above the House amount and the budget 
estimate.

              emergency management planning and assistance

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $203,044,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     199,101,000
House allowance.........................................     209,101,000

Committee recommendation

                                                             199,101,000

                          program description

    The emergency management planning and assistance 
appropriation provides resources for the following activities 
which were described previously: Response and recovery; 
preparedness, training, and exercises; fire prevention and 
training; operations support; mitigation programs; and 
executive direction. Flood plain management activity and flood 
insurance operations are funded by transfer from the national 
flood insurance fund in fiscal year 1994.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the budget request of $199,101,000 
for emergency management planning and assistance. This is a 
reduction of $3,943,000 below the 1996 level, reflecting the 
streamlining of several programs. The amount provided enables 
FEMA to increase funding in several key areas, including State 
hazard mitigation officers and enhancing State and local 
hazardous materials capabilities.
    The Committee directs FEMA to provide $1,700,000 to 
complete the Earthquake Hazard Mitigation Program with the city 
of Portland and the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral 
Industries [DOGAMI], to develop earthquake hazard maps and 
information to assist local emergency planners, land use 
planners, public officials, utilities, and businesses in 
reducing potential loss of life and property in the event of a 
major earthquake. Within this amount, funding is available for 
a DOGAMI pilot program to plan and design innovative seismic 
upgrades of historic buildings.
    The Committee is concerned about proposals to replace FEMA 
emergency response vehicles at this time. FEMA will be 
conducting a study of the baseline capabilities of its mobile 
emergency response system and mobile air transportable 
telecommunications support system, to determine out-year 
requirements. Procurements prior to the completion of this 
study would be premature.
    The Committee notes that the State of Alaska faces the 
threat of a 100-year flood disaster at the Chena River flood 
control facility near Fairbanks. FEMA, in coordination with the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other Federal agencies, is 
directed to establish a Federal task force to assess and report 
to Congress within 6 months of enactment of this act, 
recommended predisaster mitigation measures at and around the 
Chena River flood control project at Fairbanks and North Pole, 
AK.
    The Southwest currently is experiencing a severe drought 
that already has caused extensive damage in the areas of 
municipal water use, agricultural production, wildlife 
protection, and forest fire prevention. Most available 
information indicates that this only is the first of several 
years of this drought. FEMA has established a drought task 
force of the appropriate Federal agencies to plan for and 
respond to this extended drought. The Committee commends FEMA's 
efforts with the task force, and expects the agency to continue 
focusing resources, where appropriate and within the funding 
provided, on this important initiative.
    The Committee urges the Director of FEMA to give every 
consideration to the request from Harford County, MD, for 
supplemental chemical stockpile emergency preparedness funds to 
complete the emergency operations center project.
    The Committee urges FEMA to give consideration to a 
proposal by the National Institute for Environmental Renewal to 
create an Environmental Planning and Incident Mitigation Center 
for northeastern Pennsylvania. The center would provide a day-
to-day service to commercial enterprises, law enforcement, and 
local governments including environmental characterization and 
modeling, flood modeling, and other capabilities needed for 
rapid response. FEMA should assess whether such a center could 
serve as a model for other States in preparing for disasters.
    The Committee is aware of efforts by the National 
Association of Home Builders Research Foundation to organize a 
working group comprised of industry, insurers, building code 
officials, Government agencies, engineers, researchers, and 
universities to evaluate the validity of current structural 
engineering theory to housing construction standards. Applying 
valid and cost-effective engineering standards in housing 
construction will ensure maximum safety in disaster situations 
and lead to significant savings in the construction of new 
homes, thus increasing affordability and acting as a spur for 
an increase in homeownership. FEMA should assist in this effort 
to assure that engineering standards are applied to housing 
construction in the most cost-effective manner.

                       emergency food and shelter

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $100,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     100,000,000
House allowance.........................................     100,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                             100,000,000

                          program description

    The Emergency Food and Shelter Program originated as a one-
time emergency appropriation to combat the effects of high 
unemployment in the emergency jobs bill (Public Law 98-8) which 
was enacted in March 1983. It was authorized under title III of 
the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act of 1987, Public 
Law 100-177.
    The program has been administered by a national board and 
the majority of the funding has been spent for providing 
temporary food and shelter for the homeless, participating 
organizations being restricted by legislation from spending 
more than 2 percent of the funding received for administrative 
costs. The administrative ceiling was increased to 5 percent 
under the McKinney Act. However, subsequent appropriation acts 
limited administrative expenses to 3.5 percent.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends $100,000,000 for the Emergency 
Food and Shelter Program, the same level proposed by the House. 
This is the same as the fiscal year 1996 level.

                     national flood insurance fund

                          (transfers of funds)

                          program description

    The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 
authorizes the Federal Government to provide flood insurance on 
a national basis. Flood insurance may be sold or continued in 
force only in communities which enact and enforce appropriate 
flood plain management measures. Communities must participate 
in the program within 1 year of the time they are identified as 
flood-prone in order to be eligible for flood insurance and 
some forms of Federal financial assistance for acquisition or 
construction purposes. In 1994, the budget assumes collection 
of all the administrative and program costs associated with 
flood insurance activities from policyholders.
    Under the Emergency Program, structures in identified 
flood-prone areas are eligible for limited amounts of coverage 
at subsidized insurance rates. Under the regular program, 
studies must be made of different flood risks in flood prone 
areas to establish actuarial premium rates. These rates are 
charged for insurance on new construction. Coverage is 
available on virtually all types of buildings and their 
contents.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee has included bill language, as in the House, 
providing up to $20,981,000 for administrative costs from the 
Flood Insurance Program for salaries and expenses. The 
Committee has also included bill language providing up to 
$78,464,000 for flood mitigation activities including up to 
$20,000,000 for expenses under section 1366 of the National 
Flood Insurance Act.

                          WORKING CAPITAL FUND

    The Committee concurs with the House in including bill 
language authorizing a working capital fund at FEMA. This new 
revolving fund will finance the operation of facilities and 
provide services for office operations, training, conferences, 
and billeting provided by FEMA at the Mount Weather Emergency 
Assistance Center. These services are available to all 
organizations and elements of the agency, as well as other 
Federal agencies on a reimbursable basis. The working capital 
fund will be reimbursed or credited with advance payments from 
applicable appropriations of FEMA, other Federal agencies, and 
other sources authorized by law for supplies, materials, and 
services at rates which will recover the expenses of 
operations, including capital depreciation. Estimated 
obligations for fiscal year 1997 will total approximately 
$16,800,000.
    FEMA is to provide to the Committee on a quarterly basis a 
status report on the working capital fund.

                        ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION

    The Committee recommends bill language, as in the House and 
in previous VA-HUD appropriation legislation, authorizing the 
collection of user fees for the Radiological Emergency 
Preparedness Program. These fees offset the cost of this 
program, totaling $12,251,000 in fiscal year 1997.

                    General Services Administration

                      consumer information center

Appropriations, 1996....................................      $2,061,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................       2,060,000
House allowance.........................................       2,260,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               2,260,000

                          program description

    The Consumer Information Center [CIC] was established 
within the General Services Administration [GSA] by Executive 
order on October 26, 1970, to help Federal departments and 
agencies promote and distribute consumer information collected 
as a byproduct of the Government's program activities.
    The CIC promotes greater public awareness of existing 
Federal publications through wide dissemination to the general 
public of the Consumer Information Catalog. The catalog lists 
both sales and free publications available from the Government 
Printing Office [GPO] distribution facility in Pueblo, CO. In 
fiscal year 1993, the CIC distributed a total of 11.7 million 
publications. Distribution costs of the free publications are 
financed by reimbursements from the Federal agencies to the 
Consumer Information Center.
    Public Law 98-63, enacted July 30, 1983, established a 
revolving fund for the CIC. Under this fund, CIC activities are 
financed from the following: annual appropriations from the 
general funds of the Treasury, reimbursements from agencies for 
distribution of publications, user fees collected from the 
public, and any other income incident to CIC activities. All 
are available as authorized in appropriation acts without 
regard to fiscal year limitations.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee concurs with the House recommendation of 
$2,260,000 for the Consumer Information Center, an increase of 
$200,000 above the budget estimate and $199,000 above the 
enacted level. Additional funds are provided to enable CIC to 
undertake responsibility for production of the Consumer 
Resource Handbook.
    Bill language has been included, similar to House language, 
authorizing CIC to accept private sector donations to defray 
the costs of printing, publishing, and distributing consumer 
information and educational material, and undertaking consumer 
information activities. The Committee has deleted the 
administrative expense limitation. Expenditures are controlled 
adequately by the aggregate spending cap.

                Department of Health and Human Services

                    u.s. office of consumer affairs

Appropriations, 1996....................................      $1,800,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................       1,811,000
House allowance.........................................................

Committee recommendation

                                             ...........................

                          program description

    In accordance with Executive Order 11583 of February 24, 
1971, the U.S. Office of Consumer Affairs over 25 years ago 
assure that consumer needs and viewpoints are presented in the 
Federal Government; foster consideration of consumer viewpoints 
by other Government agencies, voluntary groups, and business; 
and seek to inform and educate individual citizens to deal more 
effectively in the marketplace.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the termination of the Office of 
Consumer Affairs, and the transfer of responsibility for the 
Consumer Resource Handbook to the Consumer Information Center. 
The Committee's action is intended to eliminate duplicative and 
unnecessary activities within the Federal Government.
    The Committee recognizes that providing consumers with the 
information they need to solve their own problems is far more 
effective than the Federal Government attempting to solve 
individual problems directly. Continued wide distribution of 
the Consumer Resource Handbook by a vigorous public education 
program such as the Consumer Information Center is the most 
cost-effective way to teach citizens to become self-reliant. A 
centralized Federal consumer complaint bureaucracy is an 
anachronism, contrary to the current drive to streamline 
Government and integration of consumer concerns fully into 
agencies and activities throughout the Government that have 
responsbility relating to interests of individuals as 
consumers.
    Bill language has been included, as in the House, under the 
general provisions (sec. 419) allowing for the termination of 
the Office.

             National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Appropriations, 1996

                                                         $13,903,700,000

Budget estimate, 1997

                                                      \1\ 13,804,200,000

House allowance

                                                          13,604,200,000

Committee recommendation

                                                          13,704,200,000

\1\ Excludes advance appropriation request of $900,000,000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          GENERAL DESCRIPTION

    The National Aeronautics and Space Administration was 
established by the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 
to conduct space and aeronautical research, development, and 
flight activities for peaceful purposes designed to maintain 
U.S. preeminence in aeronautics and space. These activities are 
designed to continue the Nation's premier program of space 
exploration and to invest in the development of new 
technologies to improve the competitive position of the United 
States. The NASA program provides for a vigorous national 
program ensuring leadership in world aviation and as the 
preeminent spacefaring nation.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $13,704,200,000 for the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration for fiscal year 1997. This 
amount is $100,000,000 below the budget request and 
$100,000,000 above the House allowance. The recommended budget 
for NASA for fiscal year 1997 is $199,500,000, or 1.5 percent, 
below the 1996 level.

                           HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $5,456,600,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   5,362,900,000
House allowance.........................................   5,362,900,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           5,362,900,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The objective of the human space flight appropriation is to 
provide the on-orbit infrastructure and transportation 
capability to enable people to live and work in the space 
environment. The appropriations request would provide funding 
for the continued development of the space station and 
activities which support utilization of the space station, the 
flight activities in support of the joint missions involving 
the space shuttle and the Russian Mir space station, all the 
activities required for the continuing safe operation of the 
space shuttle, and funding for the support of payloads flying 
on the shuttle and spacelab as well as advanced technology 
projects and engineering technical base support for the field 
centers supporting human space flight activities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,362,900,000 
for human space flight activities. This amount is the same as 
the budget request and the House allowance.

Termination liability

    The Committee fully supports deployment of the space 
station but recognizes the funds appropriated by this act for 
the development of the space station may not be adequate to 
cover all potential contractual commitments should the program 
be terminated for the convenience of the Government. 
Accordingly, if the space station is terminated for the 
convenience of the Government, additional appropriated funds 
may be necessary to cover such contractual commitments. In the 
event of such termination, it would be the intent of the 
Committee to provide such additional appropriations as may be 
necessary to provide fully for termination payments in a manner 
which avoids impacting the conduct of other ongoing NASA 
programs.

                  SCIENCE, AERONAUTICS, and TECHNOLOGY

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $5,928,900,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   5,862,100,000
House allowance.........................................   5,662,100,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           5,762,100,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The objectives of the NASA program of research and 
development are to extend knowledge of the Earth, its space 
environment, and the universe; to expand the practical 
applications of space technology; to provide technology for 
improving the performance of aeronautical vehicles while 
minimizing their environmental effects and energy consumption; 
and to assure continued development of the aeronautics and 
space technology and education of future generations necessary 
to accomplish national goals.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $5,762,100,000 
for science, aeronautics, and technology activities. This 
amount is $100,000,000 below the budget request, and 
$100,000,000 above the House allowance.
    The Committee recommendation proposes a general reduction 
of $100,000,000 in this account. The specific reductions to be 
taken by the agency to achieve this reduction in overall 
funding are to be identified in the agency's operating plan and 
are subject to the normal reprogramming policies of the 
Committee.

Mission to Planet Earth [MTPE]

    Mission to Planet Earth long-term climate forecasting data 
is critical to the economic vitality of numerous U.S. 
industries that are heavily weather-dependent. The Committee 
encourages NASA to collaborate with other Federal agencies and 
private industry to pursue the unlimited opportunities for 
public-private partnerships to apply mission to Planet Earth 
data for environmental, agricultural, transportation, fisheries 
and forestry management, as well as disaster prediction and 
mitigation.

Windsat

    To continue development of the Windsat mission within the 
mission to Planet Earth program, the Committee recommends an 
earmark of $5,000,000.

Radar satellite

    In the fiscal year 1996 appropriation for NASA the 
Committee recommended initiation of a phase A study for a new 
low-cost synthetic aperture radar satellite under the new 
millennium initiative. Such a project could enable the 
development of new commercial remote sensing industry beyond 
that which is being developed with optical systems and the 
current generation of radar satellite technologies. The phase A 
study should determine the feasibility of this program and 
whether it meets total program cost parameters of the new 
millennium effort and should be a candidate new start. The 
Committee directs NASA to expedite this review to permit a 
decision on this very promising program prior to final funding 
allocation decisions for fiscal year 1997.

Discovery Center

    The Committee notes that NASA is in the process of 
identifying funds within the academic programs activity to 
enable it to proceed with a grant for the Discovery Center as 
recommended in the reports accompanying the fiscal year 1996 
appropriation. It is the Committee's view that this $2,000,000 
grant should be made without further delay to enable this 
project to proceed on a timely basis.

Low-cost small launch technology project

    The Committee recommends that of the funds made available 
under this account, no reduction be made in the advanced space 
transportation program activity. In addition, the Committee has 
been advised that $12,000,000 is necessary to permit timely 
development of a new low-cost small launch technology 
demonstration project. Within the funds available, the 
Committee directs such augmentation of this important 
initiative.

Zero-based review

    The Committee is aware of a proposal under consideration by 
NASA, as part of its zero-based review, to relocate the Center 
for Aerospace Information [CASI]. The Committee is concerned 
that a full cost-benefit analysis of the impact of such a 
relocation has not been conducted, nor have all options for 
continuing this repository of technical information in its 
current location been explored. Therefore, the Committee 
expects NASA to provide a report within 30 days on its 
recommendation for continuing CASI's functions, including an 
analysis of direct and indirect costs associated with each 
option considered. The Committee also expects NASA to propose 
in this report appropriate alternative uses for the leased 
space currently occupied by CASI.
    The Committee is aware that the Upper Midwest Aerospace 
Consortium [UMAC] recently completed a successful feasibility 
study funded by NASA to translate MTPE science research results 
and data into information products of specific relevancy to 
different user communities in North and South Dakota, Montana, 
Wyoming, and Idaho through the creation of a public access 
resource center [PARC]. Because of the initial success of the 
initial study phase, NASA is funding UMAC to develop and test 
prototype products for the agriculture community through such a 
PARC. Furthermore, the Committee is aware that NASA has 
budgeted $3,000,000 per year for a peer-reviewed solicitation 
for the expanded use of MTPE data. The Committee urges NASA to 
give every consideration to funding UMAC under this 
solicitation.

                            MISSION SUPPORT

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $2,502,200,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   2,562,200,000
House allowance.........................................   2,562,200,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           2,562,200,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    This appropriation provides for mission support including 
safety, reliability, and mission assurance activities 
supporting agency programs; space communication services for 
NASA programs; salaries and related expenses in support of 
research in NASA field installations; design, repair, 
rehabilitation and modification of institutional facilities, 
and construction of new institutional facilities; and other 
operations activities supporting conduct of agency programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $2,562,200,000 for mission 
support. This amount is the same as the budget request and the 
House allowance.

NASA headquarters RIF

    The Committee is concerned that NASA's proposed rapid 
reduction of headquarters personnel will have a negative and 
irreversible impact on the agency's ability to carry out its 
mission. The proposed reduction is disproportionately excessive 
relative to the aggregate funding profile for this agency. 
Particularly troubling is the agency's apparent disregard for 
the ``Zero-Based Review'' recommendations submitted to the 
Committee on April 3, 1996. Therefore, the Committee directs 
NASA to suspend immediate implementation of the administrative 
steps to execute this proposed reduction in force until such 
time as the agency is able to justify fully its proposed 
deviation from the ``Zero-Based Review'' projected personnel 
numbers.

Wallops

    The Committee directs NASA to delay the proposed 
privatization of the sounding rocket and balloon programs at 
Wallops Island until the impact of the privatization on Federal 
employees, the Wallops mission, and the area economy is better 
understood. Furthermore, the Committee expects NASA to withhold 
further implementation of its aircraft consolidation proposal 
until the inspector general report is finalized and reviewed by 
the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and the House.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $16,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      17,000,000
House allowance.........................................      17,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              17,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Inspector General was established by the 
Inspector General Act of 1978. The Office is responsible for 
providing agencywide audit and investigative functions to 
identify and correct management and administrative deficiencies 
which create conditions for existing or potential instances of 
fraud, waste, and mismanagement.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $17,000,000 for fiscal year 1997, 
an increase of $1,000,000 over the fiscal year 1996 
appropriation level, and the same as the budget request and the 
House allowance.

                       Administrative Provisions

NASA buyout provision

    The Committee recognizes that current budget constraints 
and NASA's planned restructuring will require significant 
staffing reductions throughout the agency. Although one-half of 
the proposed staffing cuts have been achieved thus far through 
voluntary measures, it is clear that currently available 
voluntary measures will not achieve the remaining reductions. 
The Committee is concerned that a reduction in force [RIF] 
would be a costly, protracted process that would devastate 
agency morale, threaten the skill balance needed to effectively 
manage NASA programs, and undermine recent progress made in 
diversifying the work force.
    The Committee recognizes that separation incentives may be 
necessary in order to achieve the proposed reductions without a 
costly RIF. For that reason, the Committee recommends inclusion 
of a new administrative provision in the bill to provide NASA 
the authority to provide special incentive payments to 
encourage voluntary retirements or resignations. These payments 
would be limited to $25,000, and would be subject to the 
availability of funds.

                  National Credit Union Administration

                       central liquidity facility

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Direct loan       Administrative     Revolving loan 
                                                             limitation          expenses           program     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 1996...................................     ($600,000,000)         ($560,000)  .................
Budget estimate, 1997..................................      (600,000,000)          (560,000)  .................
House allowance........................................      (600,000,000)          (560,000)         $1,000,000
Committee recommendation...............................      (600,000,000)          (560,000)          1,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          program description

    The National Credit Union Administration [NCUA] Central 
Liquidity Facility [CLF] was created by the National Credit 
Union Central Liquidity Facility Act (Public Law 95-630) as a 
mixed-ownership Government corporation within the National 
Credit Union Administration. It is managed by the National 
Credit Union Administration Board and is owned by its member 
credit unions.
    The purpose of the facility is to improve the general 
financial stability of credit unions by meeting their seasonal 
and emergency liquidity needs and thereby encourage savings, 
support consumer and mortgage lending, and provide basic 
financial resources to all segments of the economy. To become 
eligible for facility services, credit unions invest in the 
capital stock of the facility, and the facility uses the 
proceeds of such investments and the proceeds of borrowed funds 
to meet the liquidity needs of credit unions. The primary 
sources of funds for the facility are the stock subscriptions 
from credit unions and borrowings.
    The facility may borrow funds from any source, with the 
amount of borrowing limited by Public Law 95-630 to 12 times 
the amount of subscribed capital stock and surplus.
    Loans are available to meet short-term requirements for 
funds attributable to emergency outflows from managerial 
difficulties or local economic downturns. Seasonal credit is 
also provided to accommodate fluctuations caused by cyclical 
changes in such areas as agriculture, education, and retail 
business. Loans can also be made to offset protracted credit 
problems caused by factors such as regional economic decline.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee concurs with the House in recommending the 
administration's proposed limitation of $600,000,000 in loans 
from the central liquidity facility for fiscal year 1997. The 
Committee also recommends the budget request of limiting 
administrative expenses for the CLF to $560,000 in fiscal year 
1997, the same as proposed in the House.
    In addition, the Committee recommends concurrence with the 
House-passed appropriation of $1,000,000 for the Community 
Development Revolving Loan Program for credit unions as 
authorized by Public Law 103-325. The Committee notes that in 
the past this revolving loan program has granted 96 loans with 
only 1 loss and as such represents a very successful program 
with a goal of improving the capability of low-income credit 
unions. The Committee encourages the National Credit Union 
Administration to ensure that the high standards used in the 
past for evaluation of loan applications continue so that loan 
losses are kept to a minimum.

                      National Science Foundation

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $3,220,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   3,325,000,000
House allowance.........................................   3,253,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           3,275,000,000

                          GENERAL DESCRIPTION

    The National Science Foundation was established as an 
independent agency by the National Science Foundation Act of 
1950 (Public Law 81-507) and is authorized to support basic and 
applied research, science and technology policy research, and 
science and engineering education programs to promote the 
progress of science and engineering in the United States.
    The Foundation supports fundamental and applied research in 
all major scientific and engineering disciplines, through 
grants, contracts, and other forms of assistance, such as 
cooperative agreements, awarded to more than 2,000 colleges and 
universities, and to nonprofit organizations and other research 
organizations in all parts of the United States. The Foundation 
also supports major national and international programs and 
research facilities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends $3,275,000,000 for the National 
Science Foundation for fiscal year 1997. This amount is 
$55,000,000 more than the 1996 level, $50,000,000 below the 
budget request, and $22,000,000 above the House allowance.

                    RESEARCH AND RELATED ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 1996....................................  $2,314,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................   2,472,000,000
House allowance.........................................   2,431,110,000

Committee recommendation

                                                           2,432,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The research and related activities appropriation addresses 
Foundation goals to enable the United States to uphold world 
leadership in all aspects of science and engineering, and to 
promote the discovery, integration, dissemination, and 
employment of new knowledge in service to society. Research 
activities will contribute to the achievement of these goals 
through expansion of the knowledge base; integration of 
research and education; stimulation of knowledge transfer among 
academia and the public and private sectors; and bringing the 
perspectives of many disciplines to bear on complex problems 
important to the Nation.
    The Foundation's discipline-oriented research programs are: 
biological sciences; computer and information science and 
engineering; engineering; geosciences; mathematical and 
physical sciences; and social, behavioral and economic 
sciences. Also included are U.S. polar research programs, U.S. 
antarctic logistical support activities, and the Critical 
Technologies Institute.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $2,432,000,000 
for research and related activities. This amount is 
$118,000,000 above the fiscal year 1996 level, $40,000,000 
below the budget request, and $890,000 above the House 
allowance. The reduction recommended by the Committee is a 
general reduction to be applied at the Foundation's discretion, 
subject to normal reprogramming guidelines. The Committee urges 
NSF to consider actions it might take to enhance the linkages 
between research and education at both the graduate and 
undergraduate level.
    The Committee recognizes the need to encourage institutions 
of higher education to better integrate research and education 
so that the education and training experience provided to 
students yields a more broadly trained and better prepared 
individual for tomorrow's technology-driven workplace 
environment. Therefore, the Committee is particularly 
supportive of the Foundation's proposal to identify and 
recognize research-oriented universities which have proven 
themselves exceptionally adept in linking research and 
education through innovative programs and activities.
    Similar to the House, the Committee's recommendation 
provides the budget request of $50,000,000 for the 
instrumentation portion of the academic research infrastructure 
program within this account. The Committee expects that the 
instrumentation program will continue to be managed as a 
Foundation-wide activity, along with its cost-sharing 
requirements, to ensure the program's visibility, and 
accessibility for all eligible research and education 
institutions.
    The science of oceanography relies heavily on the seagoing 
facilities available. The present mix of federally owned, 
academically operated ships costs more than the funds presently 
available for their operation. The National Science Foundation 
is directed to deliver by August 30, 1996, an analysis of the 
most cost-effective means of operating the academic fleet, 
taking into account the need for the gradual replacement of 
that fleet. In its response, the NSF should consider whatever 
factors in its judgment lead to the maximum scientific results 
achievable for the cost. These factors may include the benefits 
to researchers of having a fast, small water place area twin 
hull [SWATH] oceanographic ship which could dramatically reduce 
transit times and provide a more stable platform not presently 
available to the oceanographic research community.

                        MAJOR RESEARCH EQUIPMENT

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $70,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      95,000,000
House allowance.........................................      80,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              80,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The major research equipment activity will support the 
construction and procurement of unique national research 
platforms and major research equipment. Projects supported by 
this appropriation will push the boundaries of technological 
design and will offer significant expansion of opportunities, 
often in new directions, for the science and engineering 
community.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $80,000,000 
for major research equipment. This amount is $10,000,000 above 
the fiscal year 1996 level and the same as the House allowance. 
The amount recommended will reflect a reduction of $15,000,000 
of the total amount requested in the President's budget for 
construction of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave 
Observatory [LIGO] which is not needed at this time to maintain 
this project's current schedule.
    The Committee acknowledges that a continued presence at the 
South Pole is a national priority from both a scientific and 
geopolitical perspective. This policy objective was recently 
reconfirmed in the National Science and Technology Council's 
report on the U.S. Antarctic Program prepared at this 
Committee's request. The Committee remains concerned with both 
the environmental and safety conditions at the station, noting 
that a code inspection in 1993 identified over 300 
deficiencies. Therefore, the Committee recommends concurrence 
with the administration's request of $25,000,000 for the South 
Pole station safety project. The Committee understands that 
these funds will be used for the heavy maintenance facility, 
powerplant upgrade, and fuel storage facilities.
    Of the funds provided in this account, the Committee 
directs that up to $1,400,000 be available to pay any tariff 
duties assessed on the Gemini project by the U.S. Customs 
Service in conjunction with the Gemini North Telescope in 
Hawaii. This project is a basic research endeavor with 
substantial international cost sharing and of no commercial 
significance or intent. It is, therefore, a matter of some 
concern that U.S. customs duties may be levied on a scientific 
project sponsored and paid for by that same Government. The 
Committee notes that legislation has been introduced to correct 
this problem. Pending enactment of such a solution, the project 
should proceed without delay.

                     EDUCATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES

Appropriations, 1996....................................    $599,000,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     619,000,000
House allowance.........................................     612,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                             624,000,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    Education and human resources activities provide a 
comprehensive set of programs across all levels of education in 
science, mathematics, and technology. At the precollege level, 
the appropriation provides for new instructional material and 
techniques, and enrichment activities for teachers and 
students. Undergraduate initiatives support curriculum 
improvement, facility enhancement, and advanced technological 
education. Graduate level support is directed primarily to 
research fellowships and traineeships. Emphasis is given to 
systemic reform through components that address urban, rural, 
and statewide efforts in precollege education, and programs 
which seek to broaden the participation of States and regions 
in science and engineering.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $624,000,000 
for education and human resources. This amount is $25,000,000 
more than the fiscal year 1996 level, $5,000,000 more than the 
President's budget request, and $12,000,000 more than the House 
allowance.
    The Committee appreciates the Foundation's focus in its 
education activities which emphasize K-12 systemic education 
reform at the State, local, and rural level; undergraduate 
education reform through the integration of research and 
education; and graduate student education and training. 
However, the Committee strongly opposes the administration's 
proposal that the informal science education activity be 
reduced by 28 percent. -Informal science education is an 
important component of the Foundation's portfolio in math and 
science education. The Committee, therefore, recommends funding 
of informal science education activities at $38,000,000 in 
fiscal year 1997. This modest increase over the current program 
level will enable the Foundation to expand this very successful 
activity in reaching a broad cross-section of our population 
with useful scientific and technical insights.
    The Committee's recommendation also includes an increase of 
$3,000,000 for the very successful EPSCoR program which is 
designed to assist institutions in improving their potential to 
become successful competitors for basic science grants. The 
Committee considers funding for EPSCoR at this $39,910,000 
level as a very high priority to be sustained in fiscal year 
1997.
    The Committee is aware of a proposed laboratory devoted to 
research and development in the technology of learning. It is 
the Committee's understanding that this project, the National 
Center for Information Technology in Education [NCITE], had 
been under intensive formulation to address educational needs 
of a broad spectrum of the population and contemplates 
significant private participation and investment. Such efforts 
are laudatory and the Committee urges the Foundation to 
consider carefully participation in this project if an 
application is made for funding, especially to the extent that 
this project would address the NSF mission of fostering 
advancements in math and science education.

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 1996....................................\1\ $132,510,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................     134,310,000
House allowance.........................................     125,200,000
Committee recommendation................................     134,310,000

\1\ Includes $5,200,000 appropriated in a separate account for 
headquarters relocation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The salaries and expenses appropriation provides for the 
operation, management, and direction of all Foundation programs 
and activities and includes necessary funds to develop and 
coordinate NSF programs.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $134,310,000 
for salaries and expenses. This amount is $1,800,000 above the 
fiscal year 1996 level, is the same as the amount requested in 
the President's budget, and $9,110,000 more than the House 
allowance.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 1996....................................      $4,490,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................       4,690,000
House allowance.........................................       4,690,000

Committee recommendation

                                                               4,690,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Office of Inspector General appropriation provides 
audit and investigation functions to identify and correct 
deficiencies which could create potential instances of fraud, 
waste, or mismanagement.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $4,690,000 for 
the Office of Inspector General in fiscal year 1997. This 
amount is $200,000 above the fiscal year 1996 level, and is the 
same as the House allowance and the amount requested in the 
President's budget.

                 Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $38,667,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      55,000,000
House allowance.........................................      50,000,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              49,900,000

                          PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation was created by 
the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation Act (title VI of the 
Housing and Community Development Amendments of 1978, Public 
Law 95-557, October 31, 1978). Neighborhood reinvestment helps 
local communities establish working partnerships between 
residents and representatives of the public and private 
sectors. The partnership-based organizations are independent, 
tax-exempt, nonprofit entities: Neighborhood housing services 
[NHS], mutual housing associations, and apartment improvement 
programs. Collectively, these organizations are known as the 
NeighborWorks network.
    Nationally, the 177 NeighborWorks organizations 
form a solid network in approximately 150 cities effectively 
revitalizing over 348 neighborhoods. Of the neighborhoods, 71 
percent of the people served are in the very low and low-income 
brackets.
    The NeighborWorks network improves the quality of 
life in distressed neighborhoods for current residents, 
increases homeownership through targeted lending efforts, 
exerts a long-term, stabilizing influence on the neighborhood 
business environment, and reverses neighborhood decline. 
NeighborWorks organizations have been positively 
impacting urban communities for over two decades, and more 
recent experience is demonstrating the success of this approach 
in rural communities when adequate resources are available.
    Neighborhood reinvestment will continue to provide grants 
to Neighborhood Housing Services of America [NHSA], the 
NeighborWorks network's national secondary market. 
The mission of NHSA is to utilize private sector support to 
replenish local NeighborWorks organizations' 
revolving loan funds. These loans are used to back securities 
which are placed with private sector social investors.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee proposes $49,900,000 for the Neighborhood 
Reinvestment Corporation. This amount provided is an increase 
of $11,233,000 above the 1996 enacted level, but is a decrease 
of $5,100,000 below the budget request, and $100,000 below the 
House allowance. The Committee intends that this reduction 
below the House allowance be applied to NRC's proposed fiscal 
year 1997 allocation for conferences and workshops.

                        Selective Service System

                         SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 1996....................................     $22,930,000
Budget estimate, 1997...................................      22,930,000
House allowance.........................................      22,930,000

Committee recommendation

                                                              22,930,000

                          Program Description

    The Selective Service System [SSS] was reestablished by the 
Selective Service Act of 1948. The basic mission of the System 
is to be prepared to supply manpower to the Armed Forces 
adequate to ensure the security of the United States during a 
time of national emergency. Since 1973, the Armed Forces have 
relied on volunteers to fill military manpower requirements. 
However, the Selective Service System remains the primary 
vehicle by which men will be brought into the military if 
Congress and the President should authorize a return to the 
draft.
    In December 1987, Selective Service was tasked by law 
(Public Law 100-180, sec. 715) to develop plans for a 
postmobilization health care personnel delivery system capable 
of providing the necessary critically skilled health care 
personnel to the Armed Forces in time of emergency. An 
automated system capable of handling mass registration and 
inductions is now complete, together with necessary draft 
legislation, a draft Presidential proclamation, prototype forms 
and letters, et cetera. These products will be available should 
the need arise. The development of supplemental standby 
products, such as a compliance system for health care 
personnel, continues using very limited existing resources.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $22,930,000 
for the Selective Service System. This amount is the same as 
the House allowance, the fiscal year 1996 appropriation, and 
the budget request for fiscal year 1997.
                      TITLE IV--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The Committee recommends inclusion of 18 general provisions 
previously enacted in the 1996 appropriations act. They are 
standard limitations which have been carried for many years in 
the VA, HUD, and Independent Agencies appropriations bill.
    The Committee has recommended a modification to section 401 
of the general provisions, which prohibits agencies' travel 
expenses from exceeding the amounts set forth in the budget 
estimates, to accommodate OMB's change to budget estimates 
whereby object classifications have been rounded to the nearest 
million dollars. Small agencies, such as the Consumer 
Information Center, no longer reflect any travel amounts and 
thus the traditional travel limitation would have prohibited 
any travel. This modification will affect only those accounts 
with less than $499,000 in travel. The affected agencies are 
expected not to exceed the travel estimates included in their 
congressional budget justifications.
    The Committee recommends concurrence with a general 
provision proposed by the House providing for the termination 
of the Office of Consumer Affairs. Any termination costs are to 
be absorbed within the Department of Health and Human Services 
fiscal year 1996 appropriation.
    The House-passed bill also includes a new general provision 
designated section 420 which includes language authorizing 
entities of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to 
make necessary expenditures as required by the Government 
Corporation Control Act. This language formerly was included in 
a separate title of this bill. The Committee recommends 
concurrence with this provision.
    Section 421 of the House-passed bill would impose a 
prohibition on the payment of the salary of any personnel who 
approve a contract for acquisition of supercomputer equipment 
or services after a preliminary or final determination by the 
Department of Commerce that such acquisition is in violation of 
the antidumping statutes. The Committee recommends deletion of 
this provision since it constitutes a violation of the general 
agreement on tariffs and trade [GATT], the World Trade 
Organization [WTO], and the Government procurement agreement. 
In addition, the provision seeks to bypass remedies available 
under the antidumping statutes which provide for the imposition 
of special tariffs to compensate domestic industries injured by 
such unfair trade practices.
    The House provision is intended to halt the procurement of 
a supercomputer by the National Center for Atmospheric Research 
[NCAR] which is a grantee of the National Science Foundation. 
NCAR, a research institution managed by a consortium of 
universities, is in the final stages of completing a 
competitive procurement of a new supercomputer in which a 
proposal utilizing a machine manufactured in Japan is viewed as 
technically superior to that from a domestic manufacturer. 
While no determination of dumping, preliminary or otherwise, 
has been rendered by the Department of Commerce, enactment of 
this provision would jeopardize the current competition and all 
but preclude a contract award.
    Finally, the House-passed provision represents a breech of 
a reciprocal United States position with regard to the 1990 
United States-Japan supercomputer agreement which has 
substantial success in enlarging the number of Japanese 
Government purchases of United States manufactured 
supercomputers in recent years. To impede the first United 
States Government sponsored purchase of a Japanese-made 
supercomputer would reverse years of effort in opening Japanese 
markets, and undermine United States credibility in the 
promotion of free trade policies.
    The Committee recommends deletion of a provision designated 
section 422 in the House-passed bill which prohibits the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration from providing 
financial assistance for the National Center for Science 
Literacy, Education, and Technology at the American Museum of 
Natural History. The Committee does not concur with the earmark 
of $13,000,000 proposed by the House-reported bill from NASA's 
mission to Planet Earth funding for support of this new center. 
The Committee does find considerable merit to this proposed 
center and directs NASA to consider providing cost-sharing 
assistance for such valuable educational programs. Such a large 
grant, however, should not be made without merit review of an 
application, including consideration of other appropriate 
funding sources such as the National Science Foundation [NSF] 
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA].
    The House-passed bill includes three provisions designated 
sections 423, 424, and 425 which prohibit the use of funds made 
available by this act for any institution of higher education 
which excludes Reserve Officer Training Corps [ROTC] or 
military recruiting from its campus or any entity that fails to 
comply with reporting requirements of law concerning the 
employment of certain veterans. The Committee is supportive of 
efforts to promote and honor military service to the Nation. 
Utilization of an indirect prohibition on the use of funds 
contained in an appropriations bill, however, is a cumbersome 
and less than appropriate means of addressing such matters of 
principle. The Committee, therefore, does not recommend 
inclusion of these provisions. Instead, the Committee urges 
prompt consideration of these issues by the legislative 
committees of competent jurisdiction to identify more effective 
statutory solutions.
    Section 426 of the House-passed bill proposed augmentation 
of certain Department of Veterans Affairs accounts, offset by 
an across-the-board reduction taken against other accounts in 
the bill with certain exclusions. The Committee recommendation 
provides specific funding levels for each agency and account. 
The general reduction contained in this section, therefore, is 
not necessary and is proposed for deletion. Similarly, section 
427 of the House-passed bill would make augmentations offset by 
deletion of all funding for the Corporation for National and 
Community Service. As discussed at a previous point in the 
report, the Committee does not propose termination of the 
activities of the Corporation and deletion of this section is 
recommended as well.
    The House-passed bill include provisions designated section 
428 and 429 which propose riders affecting certain regulatory 
activities of the Environmental Protection Agency. The 
Committee recognizes the substantial problems and needs which 
arise due to delays in enactment of overdue environmental law 
reform. Such legislation, however, has been an impediment to 
timely enactment of this appropriations bill and, therefore, 
the Committee recommends exclusion of all such provisions.
    The second House provision would prohibit the use of 
appropriated funds for activities, not currently authorized, 
but proposed for consideration in some bills introduced in this 
Congress. The Committee recommendation proposes deletion of a 
House provision, contained in title III of this bill, which 
would have created a Superfund contingency fund to be released 
only upon enactment of subsequent authorization legislation and 
a appropriations measure. The Committee does not support 
enactment of such provisions intended to address circumstances 
which are only of a speculative, contingent nature. Moreover, 
the intended result of both such provisions are dependent on 
the future enactment of legislation, and should be addressed by 
the Congress at that point.
    Sections 430, 431, and 432 of the House-passed bill propose 
changes in substantive law affecting the underwriting standards 
of the Federal Housing Administration [FHA] single-family loan 
guarantee program. The Committee is very supportive of the 
activities of FHA in encouraging and sponsoring home ownership 
opportunities, especially for low-income families that are 
seeking to purchase their first home. The proposals contained 
in the House-passed bill appear to make a number of reasonable 
improvements. Unfortunately, this Committee does not have 
substantive jurisdiction over the standards governing this very 
complex loan guarantee program which only recently has been 
determined to meet underwriting standards which are actuarially 
sound. The Committee, therefore, recommends deferring action on 
such legislation pending substantive examination of these 
issues by the legislative committees responsible for these 
programs.
    The Committee recommends deletion of the provision 
designated section 433 of the House-passed bill which is 
intended to prohibit continued NASA participation in a joint 
Russia-France-United States cooperative life sciences 
experiment program. The Committee expects NASA, and its 
international partners, to continue rigorous adherence of 
requirements and standards regarding the humane treatment of 
animals in such experiments.
                  TITLE V--SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION

              DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

                Government National Mortgage Association

   guarantees of mortgaged-backed securities loan guarantee program 
                                account

1996 limitation on guaranteed loans to date

                                                      ($110,000,000,000)

1996 supplemental estimate

                                                        (20,000,000,000)

House allowance


Committee recommendation
                                                        (20,000,000,000)

    The Committee recommends a supplemental increase in the 
Government Mortgage Association [Ginnie Mae] mortgage-backed 
securities [MBS] commitment limitation of $20,000,000,000. This 
increase in commitment limitation is needed to provide Ginnie 
Mae with adequate commitment authority to meet the increasing 
demand of the lending community without disruption to borrowers 
seeking Government insured or guaranteed financing in fiscal 
year 1996. This supplemental does not require additional budget 
authority and would not increase outlays. The resulting loan 
guarantee limitation totals $130,000,000,000.
  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 7 of Rule XVI requires that Committee reports on 
general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment 
to the House bill ``which proposes an item of appropriation 
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing 
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously 
passed by the Senate during that session.''

                     DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

    Construction major projects: $178,250,000.

              DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

    Development of additional subsidized housing: $969,000,000.
    Prevention of resident displacement: $4,775,000,000.
    Preserving existing housing investment: $6,590,000,000.
    Fair housing activities: $30,000,000.
    HOME Investment Partnerships Program: $1,400,000,000.
    Indian housing loan guarantee fund: $3,000,000.
    Government National Mortgage Association (credit 
limitation): $110,000,000.
    Homeless assistance grants: $823,000,000.
    Community development block grants: $4,600,000,000.
    Research and technology: $34,000,000.

                   CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION

    Salaries and expenses: $42,500,000.

                    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

    Environmental programs and management: $1,713,000,000.
    Science and technology: $545,000,000.
    Buildings and facilities: $27,220,000.
    State and tribal assistance grants: $2,765,207,000.
    Superfund: $1,394,245,000.

                  FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

    Salaries and expenses: $166,733,000.
    Emergency management planning and assistance: $199,101,000.
    Emergency food and shelter: $100,000,000.

                    GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

    Consumer Information Center: $2,260,000.

             NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

    Human space flight: $5,362,900,000.
    Science, aeronautics, and technology: $5,762,100,000.
    Mission support: $2,562,200,000.

                      NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

    Research and related activities: $2,432,000,000.
    Major research equipment: $80,000,000.
    Salaries and expenses: $134,310,000.
    Education and human resources: $624,000,000.

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(C), RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, the accompanying 
bill was ordered reported from the Committee, subject to 
amendment and subject to the subcommittee allocation, by 
recorded vote of 28-0.
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Hatfield
Mr. Stevens
Mr. Cochran
Mr. Specter
Mr. Domenici
Mr. Bond
Mr. Gorton
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Mack
Mr. Burns
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Jeffords
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mr. Campbell
Mr. Byrd
Mr. Inouye
Mr. Hollings
Mr. Johnston
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Bumpers
Mr. Lautenberg
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Reid
Mr. Kerrey
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute 
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or 
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a 
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution 
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof 
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and 
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical 
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the 
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by 
the committee.''
    As discussed earlier in this report, the dramatic and 
unprecedented constraints on domestic discretionary spending 
has made necessary inclusion of a considerable volume of 
legislative reforms and other changes in existing statutes in 
the Committee recommendation. This is particularly in evidence 
in title II, the Department of Housing and Urban Development 
portion of this bill, in which cost-saving and cost-avoidance 
measures for discretionary housing and community development 
activities require modification of programs governed a large 
body of detailed and complex statutory provisions.
    The Committee has included substantial explanatory material 
in this report which attempts to fully detail both the intent 
and practical effect of these statutory provisions. In view of 
the extensive nature of these changes, however, preparation of 
a comparative print detailing each of these statutory 
amendments would delay prompt availability of this report. In 
the opinion of the Committee, it is necessary to dispense with 
the requirements of paragraph 12 of rule XXVI to expedite the 
business of the Senate.

                                            BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL                                            
  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS  
                                                     AMENDED                                                    
                                            [In millions of dollars]                                            
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Budget authority               Outlays        
                                                             ---------------------------------------------------
                                                               Committee    Amount  of   Committee    Amount  of
                                                               allocation      bill      allocation      bill   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations                                                    
 to its subcommittees of amounts in the First Concurrent                                                        
 Resolution for 1997: Subcommittee on VA, HUD, and                                                              
 Independent Agencies:                                                                                          
    Defense discretionary...................................          129          125          129      \1\ 125
    Nondefense discretionary................................       64,325       64,325       79,048       79,038
    Violent crime reduction fund............................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........
    Mandatory...............................................       19,854       20,260       19,547       19,166
Projection of outlays associated with the recommendation:                                                       
    1997....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........   \2\ 49,691
    1998....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........       19,321
    1999....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        7,100
    2000....................................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        4,084
    2001 and future years...................................  ...........  ...........  ...........        2,673
Financial assistance to State and local governments for 1997                                                    
 in bill....................................................           NA       15,256           NA          981
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.                                                          
\2\ Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.                                                          
                                                                                                                
NA: Not applicable.                                                                                             


                 COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997                
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                       Senate Committee recommendation compared with (+ or -)   
                         Item                                 1996         Budget estimate    House allowance       Committee     --------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         appropriation                                            recommendation    1996 appropriation    Budget estimate      House allowance  
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                                                                
                       TITLE I                                                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                
            DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS                                                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                                                                
           Veterans Benefits Administration                                                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Compensation and pensions............................   $18,331,561,000    $18,497,854,000    $18,497,854,000    $18,671,259,000        +$339,698,000        +$173,405,000        +$173,405,000 
Readjustment benefits................................     1,345,300,000      1,227,000,000      1,227,000,000      1,377,000,000          +31,700,000         +150,000,000         +150,000,000 
Veterans insurance and indemnities...................        24,890,000         38,970,000         38,970,000         38,970,000          +14,080,000   ...................  ...................
Guaranty and indemnity program account (indefinite)..       504,122,000        158,643,000        158,643,000        158,643,000         -345,479,000   ...................  ...................
    Negative subsidy for guaranteed loans............      -185,500,000   .................  .................  .................        +185,500,000   ...................  ...................
    Administrative expenses..........................        65,226,000        107,703,000        105,226,000        105,226,000          +40,000,000           -2,477,000   ...................
Loan guaranty program account (indefinite)...........        22,950,000         14,091,000         14,091,000         14,091,000           -8,859,000   ...................  ...................
    Administrative expenses..........................        52,138,000         33,810,000         33,810,000         33,810,000          -18,328,000   ...................  ...................
    (By transfer)....................................        (6,000,000)  .................  .................  .................         (-6,000,000)  ...................  ...................
Direct loan program account (indefinite).............            28,000             30,000             30,000             30,000               +2,000   ...................  ...................
    (Limitation on direct loans).....................          (300,000)          (300,000)          (300,000)          (300,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    Administrative expenses..........................           459,000             80,000             80,000             80,000             -379,000   ...................  ...................
    (Loan level).....................................           (99,000)           (64,000)           (64,000)           (64,000)            (-35,000)  ...................  ...................
Education loan fund program account..................             1,000              1,000              1,000              1,000   ...................  ...................  ...................
    (Limitation on direct loans).....................            (4,000)            (3,000)            (3,000)            (3,000)             (-1,000)  ...................  ...................
    Administrative expenses..........................           195,000            204,000            195,000            195,000   ...................              -9,000   ...................
Vocational rehabilitation loans program account......            54,000             49,000             49,000             49,000               -5,000   ...................  ...................
    (Limitation on direct loans).....................        (1,964,000)        (2,822,000)        (1,964,000)        (2,822,000)           (+858,000)  ...................           (+858,000)
    Administrative expenses..........................           377,000            507,000            377,000            377,000   ...................            -130,000   ...................
Native American Veteran Housing Loan Program Ac-                                                                                                                                                
 count...............................................           205,000            434,000            205,000            205,000   ...................            -229,000   ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Veterans Benefits Administration........    20,162,006,000     20,079,376,000     20,076,531,000     20,399,936,000         +237,930,000         +320,560,000         +323,405,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
            Veterans Health Administration                                                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Medical care.........................................    15,775,000,000     16,438,447,000     16,498,447,000     16,412,447,000         +637,447,000          -26,000,000          -86,000,000 
    (Transfer out)...................................       (-4,500,000)  .................  .................  .................         (+4,500,000)  ...................  ...................
    Delayed equipment obligation.....................       789,000,000        570,000,000        570,000,000        596,000,000         -193,000,000          +26,000,000          +26,000,000 
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total..........................................    16,564,000,000     17,008,447,000     17,068,447,000     17,008,447,000         +444,447,000   ...................         -60,000,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
Medical and prosthetic research......................       257,000,000        257,000,000        277,000,000        262,000,000           +5,000,000           +5,000,000          -15,000,000 
Medical administration and miscellaneous operating                                                                                                                                              
 expenses............................................        63,602,000         62,207,000         59,207,000         62,207,000           -1,395,000   ...................          +3,000,000 
    (By transfer)....................................        (4,500,000)  .................  .................  .................         (-4,500,000)  ...................  ...................
Transitional housing loan program:                                                                                                                                                              
    Loan program account (by transfer)...............            (7,000)            (7,000)            (7,000)            (7,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    Administrative expenses (by transfer)............           (54,000)           (54,000)           (54,000)           (54,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    (Limitation on direct loans).....................           (70,000)           (70,000)           (70,000)           (70,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
General post fund (transfer out).....................          (-61,000)          (-61,000)          (-61,000)          (-61,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Veterans Health Administration..........    16,884,602,000     17,327,654,000     17,404,654,000     17,332,654,000         +448,052,000           +5,000,000          -72,000,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
             Departmental Administration                                                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                                                                                
General operating expenses...........................       848,143,000        843,730,000        840,584,000        813,730,000          -34,413,000          -30,000,000          -26,854,000 
    Offsetting receipts..............................       (32,000,000)       (32,000,000)       (32,000,000)       (32,000,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    (Transfer out)...................................       (-6,000,000)  .................  .................  .................         (+6,000,000)  ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Program Level...........................      (874,143,000)      (875,730,000)      (872,584,000)      (845,730,000)        (-28,413,000)        (-30,000,000)        (-26,854,000)
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
National Cemetery System.............................        72,604,000         76,864,000         76,864,000         76,864,000           +4,260,000   ...................  ...................
Office of Inspector General..........................        30,900,000         31,175,000         30,900,000         30,900,000   ...................            -275,000   ...................
Construction, major projects.........................       136,155,000        249,900,000        245,358,000        178,250,000          +42,095,000          -71,650,000          -67,108,000 
    (Transfer out)...................................       (-7,000,000)  .................  .................  .................         (+7,000,000)  ...................  ...................
Construction, minor projects.........................       190,000,000        189,241,000        160,000,000        190,000,000   ...................            +759,000          +30,000,000 
Parking revolving fund...............................  .................  .................        12,300,000   .................  ...................  ...................         -12,300,000 
    (By transfer)....................................        (7,000,000)  .................  .................  .................         (-7,000,000)  ...................  ...................
Grants for construction of state extended care facili-                                                                                                                                          
   ties..............................................        47,397,000         39,909,000         47,397,000         47,397,000   ...................          +7,488,000   ...................
Grants for the construction of state veterans cemeter-                                                                                                                                          
   ies...............................................         1,000,000          1,000,000          1,000,000          1,000,000   ...................  ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Departmental Administration.............     1,326,199,000      1,431,819,000      1,414,403,000      1,338,141,000          +11,942,000          -93,678,000          -76,262,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
      Total, title I, Department of Veterans Affairs.    38,372,807,000     38,838,849,000     38,895,588,000     39,070,731,000         +697,924,000         +231,882,000         +175,143,000 
          (By transfer)..............................       (17,561,000)           (61,000)           (61,000)           (61,000)        (-17,500,000)  ...................  ...................
          (Limitation on direct loans)...............        (2,437,000)        (3,259,000)        (2,401,000)        (3,259,000)           (+822,000)  ...................           (+858,000)
          Consisting of:                                                                                                                                                                        
              Mandatory..............................   (20,043,351,000)   (19,936,588,000)   (19,936,588,000)   (20,259,993,000)       (+216,642,000)       (+323,405,000)       (+323,405,000)
              Discretionary..........................   (18,329,456,000)   (18,902,261,000)   (18,959,000,000)   (18,810,738,000)       (+481,282,000)        (-91,523,000)       (-148,262,000)
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
                       TITLE II                                                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
     DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT                                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                                                                                
              Selected Housing Programs                                                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Annual contributions for assisted housing............     9,818,795,000      5,597,000,000      5,132,000,000   .................      -9,818,795,000       -5,597,000,000       -5,132,000,000 
    Prepayment authority.............................         4,000,000   .................  .................  .................          -4,000,000   ...................  ...................
    Rescission.......................................  .................      -123,000,000   .................  .................  ...................        +123,000,000   ...................
    Transfer to housing certificates funds...........  .................     (-100,000,000)  .................  .................  ...................       (+100,000,000)  ...................
Housing for special populations: Elderly and disabled  .................       769,000,000        909,000,000   .................  ...................        -769,000,000         -909,000,000 
Rental housing assistance:                                                                                                                                                                      
    Rescission of budget authority, indefinite.......       -35,119,000   .................  .................  .................         +35,119,000   ...................  ...................
    (Limitation on annual contract authority, indefin-                                                                                                                                          
       ite)..........................................       (-2,000,000)       (-2,000,000)       (-2,000,000)       (-2,000,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    Rescission of prepayment recaptures..............      -163,000,000   .................  .................  .................        +163,000,000   ...................  ...................
Housing certificates funds...........................  .................       290,000,000        166,000,000   .................  ...................        -290,000,000         -166,000,000 
    Transfer from annual contributions...............  .................      (100,000,000)  .................  .................  ...................       (-100,000,000)  ...................
Public housing operating fund........................     2,800,000,000      2,900,000,000      2,850,000,000   .................      -2,800,000,000       -2,900,000,000       -2,850,000,000 
Public and Indian housing capital funds..............  .................     2,700,000,000      2,700,000,000   .................  ...................      -2,700,000,000       -2,700,000,000 
Public and Indian housing bonus program..............  .................       500,000,000   .................  .................  ...................        -500,000,000   ...................
Revitalization of severely distressed public housing                                                                                                                                            
 (HOPE VII)..........................................       480,000,000        650,000,000        550,000,000   .................        -480,000,000         -650,000,000         -550,000,000 
Drug elimination grants for low-income housing.......       290,000,000        290,000,000        290,000,000   .................        -290,000,000         -290,000,000         -290,000,000 
Development of additional subsidized housing.........  .................  .................  .................       969,000,000         +969,000,000         +969,000,000         +969,000,000 
Prevention of resident displacement..................  .................  .................  .................     4,775,000,000       +4,775,000,000       +4,775,000,000       +4,775,000,000 
Preserving existing housing investment...............  .................  .................  .................     6,590,000,000       +6,590,000,000       +6,590,000,000       +6,590,000,000 
    Spending from IRP contract recaptures............  .................  .................  .................  .................  ...................  ...................  ...................
    Prepayment authority.............................  .................  .................  .................         2,000,000           +2,000,000           +2,000,000           +2,000,000 
Violent crime reduction program......................  .................         3,000,000   .................  .................  ...................          -3,000,000   ...................
Indian housing loan guarantee fund program account...         3,000,000          3,000,000          3,000,000          3,000,000   ...................  ...................  ...................
    (Limitation on guarantee loans)..................       (36,900,000)       (36,900,000)       (36,900,000)       (36,900,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
          Community Planning and Development                                                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Community development grants.........................     4,600,000,000      4,600,000,000      4,300,000,000      4,600,000,000   ...................  ...................        +300,000,000 
    Delay of obligation..............................  .................  .................       300,000,000   .................  ...................  ...................        -300,000,000 
    Emergency appropriations.........................       (50,000,000)  .................  .................  .................        (-50,000,000)  ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total..........................................     4,600,000,000      4,600,000,000      4,600,000,000      4,600,000,000   ...................  ...................  ...................
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
CDBG/economic development bonus program..............  .................       300,000,000   .................  .................  ...................        -300,000,000   ...................
Section 108 loan guarantees:                                                                                                                                                                    
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans).................    (1,500,000,000)    (2,000,000,000)    (1,500,000,000)    (1,500,000,000)  ...................       (-500,000,000)  ...................
    Credit subsidy...................................        31,750,000         46,000,000         31,750,000         31,750,000   ...................         -14,250,000   ...................
    Administrative expenses..........................           675,000            675,000            675,000            675,000   ...................  ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total..........................................     4,632,425,000      4,946,675,000      4,632,425,000      4,632,425,000   ...................        -314,250,000   ...................
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
HOME investment partnerships program.................     1,400,000,000      1,400,000,000      1,400,000,000      1,400,000,000   ...................  ...................  ...................
HOME fund challenge grant bonus program..............  .................       150,000,000   .................  .................  ...................        -150,000,000   ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Selected housing programs (net).........    19,230,101,000     20,075,675,000     18,632,425,000     18,371,425,000         -858,676,000       -1,704,250,000         -261,000,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
                                                                                                                                                                                                
                 Homeless Assistance                                                                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Homeless assistance grants...........................       823,000,000      1,010,000,000        823,000,000        823,000,000   ...................        -187,000,000   ...................
Homeless grant bonus program.........................  .................       110,000,000   .................  .................  ...................        -110,000,000   ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total..........................................       823,000,000      1,120,000,000        823,000,000        823,000,000   ...................        -297,000,000   ...................
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
Housing opportunities for persons with AIDS..........  .................       171,000,000        171,000,000        171,000,000         +171,000,000   ...................  ...................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
            Federal Housing Administration                                                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                                                                
FHA--Mutual mortgage insurance program account:                                                                                                                                                 
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans).................  (110,000,000,000)  (110,000,000,000)  (110,000,000,000)  (110,000,000,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    (Limitation on direct loans).....................      (200,000,000)      (200,000,000)      (200,000,000)      (200,000,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    Administrative expenses..........................       341,595,000        350,595,000        341,595,000        350,595,000           +9,000,000   ...................          +9,000,000 
    Offsetting receipts..............................      -341,595,000       -350,595,000       -341,595,000       -350,595,000           -9,000,000   ...................          -9,000,000 
FHA--General and special risk program account:                                                                                                                                                  
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans).................   (17,400,000,000)   (17,400,000,000)   (17,400,000,000)   (17,400,000,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    (Limitation on direct loans).....................      (120,000,000)      (120,000,000)      (120,000,000)      (120,000,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    Administrative expenses..........................       202,470,000        207,470,000        202,470,000        207,470,000           +5,000,000   ...................          +5,000,000 
    Program costs....................................        85,000,000        160,000,000         85,000,000         85,000,000   ...................         -75,000,000   ...................
    Subsidy--multifamily.............................       -37,996,000        -18,000,000        -18,000,000        -18,000,000          +19,996,000   ...................  ...................
    Subsidy--single family...........................       -27,044,000        -64,000,000        -64,000,000        -64,000,000          -36,956,000   ...................  ...................
    Subsidy--Title I.................................       -23,777,000        -25,000,000        -25,000,000        -25,000,000           -1,223,000   ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Housing Administration..........       198,653,000        260,470,000        180,470,000        185,470,000          -13,183,000          -75,000,000           +5,000,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
       Government National Mortgage Association                                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan                                                                                                                                                   
 guarantee program account:                                                                                                                                                                     
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans).................  (110,000,000,000)  (110,000,000,000)  (110,000,000,000)  (110,000,000,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    Administrative expenses..........................         9,101,000          9,383,000          9,101,000          9,383,000             +282,000   ...................            +282,000 
    Offsetting receipts..............................      -508,300,000       -218,000,000       -218,000,000       -218,000,000         +290,300,000   ...................  ...................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
           Policy Development and Research                                                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Research and technology..............................        34,000,000         45,000,000         34,000,000         34,000,000   ...................         -11,000,000   ...................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
          Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity                                                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Fair housing activities..............................        30,000,000         33,000,000         30,000,000         30,000,000   ...................          -3,000,000   ...................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
            Management and Administration                                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Salaries and expenses................................       420,000,000        430,718,000        376,589,000        420,000,000   ...................         -10,718,000          +43,411,000 
    (By transfer, limitation on FHA corporate funds).      (532,782,000)      (546,782,000)      (532,782,000)      (546,782,000)        (+14,000,000)  ...................        (+14,000,000)
    (By transfer, GNMA)..............................        (9,101,000)        (9,383,000)        (9,101,000)        (9,383,000)           (+282,000)  ...................           (+282,000)
    (By transfer, Community Planning and Development)          (675,000)          (675,000)          (675,000)          (675,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total, Salaries and expenses.................      (962,558,000)      (987,558,000)      (919,147,000)      (976,840,000)        (+14,282,000)        (-10,718,000)        (+57,693,000)
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
Office of Inspector General..........................        36,567,000         36,567,000         36,567,000         36,567,000   ...................  ...................  ...................
    (By transfer, limitation on FHA corporate funds).       (11,283,000)       (11,283,000)       (11,283,000)       (11,283,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    (By transfer from Drug Elimination Grants).......  .................        (5,000,000)        (5,000,000)        (5,000,000)         (+5,000,000)  ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Office of Inspector General.............       (47,850,000)       (52,850,000)       (52,850,000)       (52,850,000)         (+5,000,000)  ...................  ...................
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight.......        14,895,000         15,751,000         14,895,000         15,751,000             +856,000   ...................            +856,000 
    Offsetting receipts..............................       -14,895,000        -15,751,000        -14,895,000        -15,751,000             -856,000   ...................            -856,000 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
              Administrative Provisions                                                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                                                                                
1-year extension of HECM's demonstration.............        -7,000,000   .................  .................  .................          +7,000,000   ...................  ...................
FHA Assignment Reform................................    -1,066,000,000   .................  .................  .................      +1,066,000,000   ...................  ...................
FHA Assignment Reform, 1997..........................       -96,000,000   .................      -128,000,000       -128,000,000          -32,000,000         -128,000,000   ...................
Multifamily property disposition--FHA fund...........       -40,000,000   .................       -80,000,000        -80,000,000          -40,000,000          -80,000,000   ...................
Sec. 212--demonstation...............................        30,000,000   .................  .................        10,000,000          -20,000,000          +10,000,000          +10,000,000 
Sec. 224--FHA fund...................................        33,000,000   .................  .................  .................         -33,000,000   ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, administrative provisions...............    -1,146,000,000   .................      -208,000,000       -198,000,000         +948,000,000         -198,000,000          +10,000,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
      Total, title II, Department of Housing and                                                                                                                                                
       Urban Development (net).......................    19,127,122,000     21,963,813,000     19,867,152,000     19,664,845,000         +537,723,000       -2,298,968,000         -202,307,000 
              Appropriations.........................   (19,325,241,000)   (21,963,813,000)   (19,867,152,000)   (19,664,845,000)       (+339,604,000)     (-2,298,968,000)       (-202,307,000)
              Rescissions............................     (-198,119,000)  .................  .................  .................       (+198,119,000)  ...................  ...................
          (Limitation on annual contract authority,                                                                                                                                             
           indefinite)...............................       (-2,000,000)       (-2,000,000)       (-2,000,000)       (-2,000,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
          (Limitation on guaranteed loans)...........  (238,900,000,000)  (239,400,000,000)  (238,900,000,000)  (238,900,000,000)  ...................       (-500,000,000)  ...................
          (Limitation on corporate funds)............      (553,841,000)      (573,123,000)      (558,841,000)      (573,123,000)        (+19,282,000)  ...................        (+14,282,000)
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
                      TITLE III                                                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
                 INDEPENDENT AGENCIES                                                                                                                                                           
                                                                                                                                                                                                
         American Battle Monuments Commission                                                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Salaries and expenses................................        20,265,000         20,400,000         22,265,000         22,265,000           +2,000,000           +1,865,000   ...................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
     Community Development Financial Institutions                                                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Community development financial institutions fund                                                                                                                                               
 program account.....................................        45,000,000        125,000,000         45,000,000         45,000,000   ...................         -80,000,000   ...................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
          Consumer Product Safety Commission                                                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Salaries and expenses................................        40,000,000         42,500,000         42,500,000         42,500,000           +2,500,000   ...................  ...................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
    Corporation for National and Community Service                                                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                                                                                
National and community service programs operating                                                                                                                                               
 expenses............................................       400,500,000        543,549,000   .................       400,500,000   ...................        -143,049,000         +400,500,000 
Office of Inspector General..........................         2,000,000          2,125,000   .................         2,000,000   ...................            -125,000           +2,000,000 
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total..........................................       402,500,000        545,674,000   .................       402,500,000   ...................        -143,174,000         +402,500,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
                                                                                                                                                                                                
              Court of Veterans Appeals                                                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Salaries and expenses................................         9,000,000          8,795,000         10,640,000          9,229,000             +229,000             +434,000           -1,411,000 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
             Department of Defense--Civil                                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                                                                                
              Cemeterial Expenses, Army                                                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Salaries and expenses................................        11,946,000         11,600,000         11,600,000         11,600,000             -346,000   ...................  ...................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
           Environmental Protection Agency                                                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Science and Technology...............................       525,000,000        578,748,000        538,500,000        545,000,000          +20,000,000          -33,748,000           +6,500,000 
    Transfer from hazardous substance superfund......  .................        43,000,000         35,000,000         35,000,000          +35,000,000           -8,000,000   ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Science and Technology...............       525,000,000        621,748,000        573,500,000        580,000,000          +55,000,000          -41,748,000           +6,500,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
Environmental Programs and Management................     1,677,300,000      1,894,329,000      1,704,500,000      1,713,000,000          +35,700,000         -181,329,000           +8,500,000 
Office of Inspector General..........................        28,500,000         30,744,000         28,500,000         28,500,000   ...................          -2,244,000   ...................
    Transfer from Hazardous Substance Superfund......        11,000,000         11,000,000         11,000,000         11,000,000   ...................  ...................  ...................
    Transfer from Leaking Underground Storage  Tanks.           500,000          1,000,000            577,000            577,000              +77,000             -423,000   ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Subtotal, OIG................................        40,000,000         42,744,000         40,077,000         40,077,000              +77,000           -2,667,000   ...................
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
Buildings and facilities.............................       110,000,000        209,220,000        107,220,000         27,220,000          -82,780,000         -182,000,000          -80,000,000 
Hazardous substance superfund........................     1,213,400,000      1,394,245,000      2,201,200,000      1,294,245,000          +80,845,000         -100,000,000         -906,955,000 
    Reauthorization legislation contingency..........  .................  .................      -861,000,000   .................  ...................  ...................        +861,000,000 
    Delay of obligation..............................       100,000,000   .................  .................       100,000,000   ...................        +100,000,000         +100,000,000 
    Transfer to OIG..................................       -11,000,000        -11,000,000        -11,000,000        -11,000,000   ...................  ...................  ...................
    Transfer to science and technology...............  .................       -43,000,000        -35,000,000        -35,000,000          -35,000,000           +8,000,000   ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Hazardous substance superfund........     1,302,400,000      1,340,245,000      1,294,200,000      1,348,245,000          +45,845,000           +8,000,000          +54,045,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
Leaking underground storage tank trust fund..........        45,827,000         67,119,000         66,500,000         60,000,000          +14,173,000           -7,119,000           -6,500,000 
    Transfer to OIG..................................          -500,000         -1,000,000           -577,000           -577,000              -77,000             +423,000   ...................
    (Limitation on administrative expenses)..........        (7,000,000)  .................        (7,000,000)        (7,000,000)  ...................         (+7,000,000)  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, LUST.................................        45,327,000         66,119,000         65,923,000         59,423,000          +14,096,000           -6,696,000           -6,500,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
Oil spill response...................................        15,000,000         15,305,000         15,000,000         15,000,000   ...................            -305,000   ...................
    (Limitation on administrative expenses)..........        (8,000,000)  .................        (8,000,000)        (8,000,000)  ...................         (+8,000,000)  ...................
State and Tribal Assistance Grants...................     2,813,000,000      2,852,207,000      2,768,207,000      2,815,207,000           +2,207,000          -37,000,000          +47,000,000 
Working capital fund.................................  .................      (101,526,000)      (101,526,000)      (101,526,000)       (+101,526,000)  ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, EPA.....................................     6,528,027,000      7,041,917,000      6,568,627,000      6,598,172,000          +70,145,000         -443,745,000          +29,545,000 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
          Executive Office of the President                                                                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Office of Science and Technology Policy..............         4,981,000          4,932,000          4,932,000          4,932,000              -49,000   ...................  ...................
Council on Environmental Quality and Office of                                                                                                                                                  
 Environmental Quality...............................         2,150,000          2,436,000          2,250,000          2,436,000             +286,000   ...................            +186,000 
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total..........................................         7,131,000          7,368,000          7,182,000          7,368,000             +237,000   ...................            +186,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
         Federal Emergency Management Agency                                                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Disaster relief......................................       222,000,000        320,000,000      1,120,000,000      1,320,000,000       +1,098,000,000       +1,000,000,000         +200,000,000 
    Rescission of emergency appropriations...........   (-1,000,000,000)  .................  .................  .................     (+1,000,000,000)  ...................  ...................
Disaster assistance direct loan program account:                                                                                                                                                
    State share loan.................................         2,155,000          1,385,000          1,385,000          1,385,000             -770,000   ...................  ...................
        (Transfer from Disaster relief--emergency)...      (104,000,000)  .................  .................  .................       (-104,000,000)  ...................  ...................
        (Limitation on direct loans).................       (25,000,000)       (25,000,000)       (25,000,000)       (25,000,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    Administrative expenses..........................            95,000            548,000            548,000            548,000             +453,000   ...................  ...................
Salaries and expenses................................       168,900,000        166,733,000        168,000,000        166,733,000           -2,167,000   ...................          -1,267,000 
Office of the Inspector General......................         4,673,000          4,533,000          4,533,000          4,673,000   ...................            +140,000             +140,000 
Emergency management planning and assistance.........       203,044,000        199,101,000        209,101,000        199,101,000           -3,943,000   ...................         -10,000,000 
Emergency food and shelter program...................       100,000,000        100,000,000        100,000,000        100,000,000   ...................  ...................  ...................
Administrative provision REP savings.................       -12,257,000        -12,251,000        -12,251,000        -12,251,000               +6,000   ...................  ...................
Equipment sales (sec. 519)...........................       -10,000,000   .................  .................  .................         +10,000,000   ...................  ...................
Working capital fund.................................  .................       (16,816,000)       (16,816,000)       (16,816,000)        (+16,816,000)  ...................  ...................
National Flood Insurance:                                                                                                                                                                       
    Salaries and expenses............................       (20,562,000)       (20,981,000)       (20,981,000)       (20,981,000)           (+419,000)  ...................  ...................
    Flood mitigation.................................       (70,464,000)       (78,464,000)       (78,464,000)       (78,464,000)         (+8,000,000)  ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Emergency Management Agency.....       678,610,000        780,049,000      1,591,316,000      1,780,189,000       +1,101,579,000       +1,000,140,000         +188,873,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
           General Services Administration                                                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Consumer Information Center..........................         2,061,000          2,060,000          2,260,000          2,260,000             +199,000             +200,000   ...................
    (Limitation on administrative expenses)..........        (2,602,000)  .................        (2,602,000)  .................         (-2,602,000)  ...................         (-2,602,000)
                                                                                                                                                                                                
       Department of Health and Human Services                                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Office of Consumer Affairs...........................         1,800,000          1,811,000   .................  .................          -1,800,000           -1,811,000   ...................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration                                                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Human space flight...................................     5,456,600,000      5,362,900,000      5,362,900,000      5,362,900,000          -93,700,000   ...................  ...................
Science, aeronautics and technology..................     5,928,900,000      5,862,100,000      5,662,100,000      5,762,100,000         -166,800,000         -100,000,000         +100,000,000 
Mission support......................................     2,502,200,000      2,562,200,000      2,562,200,000      2,562,200,000          +60,000,000   ...................  ...................
Office of Inspector General..........................        16,000,000         17,000,000         17,000,000         17,000,000           +1,000,000   ...................  ...................
Administrative provision: Transfer authority.........       (50,000,000)  .................  .................  .................        (-50,000,000)  ...................  ...................
Fixed asset acquisitions (sec 621):                                                                                                                                                             
    Tracking and Data Relay Satellite Replenishment                                                                                                                                             
     program.........................................  .................       558,000,000   .................  .................  ...................        -558,000,000   ...................
    New Millennium program...........................  .................       342,000,000   .................  .................  ...................        -342,000,000   ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, NASA....................................    13,903,700,000     14,704,200,000     13,604,200,000     13,704,200,000         -199,500,000       -1,000,000,000         +100,000,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
         National Credit Union Administration                                                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Central liquidity facility:                                                                                                                                                                     
    (Limitation on direct loans).....................      (600,000,000)      (600,000,000)      (600,000,000)      (600,000,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    (Limitation on administrative expenses, corporate                                                                                                                                           
     funds)..........................................          (560,000)          (560,000)          (560,000)          (560,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
    Revolving loan program...........................  .................  .................         1,000,000          1,000,000           +1,000,000           +1,000,000   ...................
                                                                                                                                                                                                
             National Science Foundation                                                                                                                                                        
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Research and related activities......................     2,314,000,000      2,472,000,000      2,431,110,000      2,432,000,000         +118,000,000          -40,000,000             +890,000 
Major research equipment.............................        70,000,000         95,000,000         80,000,000         80,000,000          +10,000,000          -15,000,000   ...................
Academic research infrastructure.....................       100,000,000   .................  .................  .................        -100,000,000   ...................  ...................
Education and human resources........................       599,000,000        619,000,000        612,000,000        624,000,000          +25,000,000           +5,000,000          +12,000,000 
Salaries and expenses................................       127,310,000        134,310,000        125,200,000        134,310,000           +7,000,000   ...................          +9,110,000 
Office of Inspector General..........................         4,490,000          4,690,000          4,690,000          4,690,000             +200,000   ...................  ...................
National Science Foundation headquarters relocation..         5,200,000   .................  .................  .................          -5,200,000   ...................  ...................
                                                      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, NSF.....................................     3,220,000,000      3,325,000,000      3,253,000,000      3,275,000,000          +55,000,000          -50,000,000          +22,000,000 
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
                                                                                                                                                                                                
        Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation                                                                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Payment to the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corpora-                                                                                                                                               
 tion................................................        38,667,000         55,000,000         50,000,000         49,900,000          +11,233,000           -5,100,000             -100,000 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
               Selective Service System                                                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Salaries and expenses................................        22,930,000         22,930,000         22,930,000         22,930,000   ...................  ...................  ...................
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
      Total, title III, Independent agencies (net)...    24,931,637,000     26,694,304,000     25,232,520,000     25,974,113,000       +1,042,476,000         -720,191,000         +741,593,000 
              Appropriations.........................   (24,931,637,000)   (26,694,304,000)   (25,232,520,000)   (25,974,113,000)     (+1,042,476,000)       (-720,191,000)       (+741,593,000)
          (Limitation on administrative expenses)....       (17,602,000)  .................       (17,602,000)       (15,000,000)         (-2,602,000)        (+15,000,000)         (-2,602,000)
          (Limitation on direct loans)...............      (716,026,000)      (724,445,000)      (724,445,000)      (724,445,000)         (+8,419,000)  ...................  ...................
          (Limitation on corporate funds)............          (560,000)          (560,000)          (560,000)          (560,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
                     CORPORATIONS                                                                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Resolution Trust Corporation: Office of Inspector                                                                                                                                               
 Gener-  al..........................................        11,400,000   .................  .................  .................         -11,400,000   ...................  ...................
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
                       TITLE V                                                                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                
     SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION--FISCAL YEAR 1996                                                                                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                                                                
     DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT                                                                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                                                                                
       Government National Mortgage Association                                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                                                                
Guarantees of mortgage-backed securities loan                                                                                                                                                   
 guarantee program account: (Limitation on guaranteed                                                                                                                                           
 loans)..............................................  .................   (20,000,000,000)  .................   (20,000,000,000)    (+20,000,000,000)  ...................    (+20,000,000,000)
                                                      ==========================================================================================================================================
      Grand total (net)..............................    82,442,966,000     87,496,966,000     83,995,260,000     84,709,689,000       +2,266,723,000       -2,787,277,000         +714,429,000 
              Appropriations.........................   (82,641,085,000)   (87,496,966,000)   (83,995,260,000)   (84,709,689,000)     (+2,068,604,000)     (-2,787,277,000)       (+714,429,000)
              Rescissions............................     (-198,119,000)  .................  .................  .................       (+198,119,000)  ...................  ...................
          (By transfer)..............................      (121,561,000)      (100,061,000)           (61,000)           (61,000)       (-121,500,000)       (-100,000,000)  ...................
          (Limitation on administrative expenses)....       (17,602,000)  .................       (17,602,000)       (15,000,000)         (-2,602,000)        (+15,000,000)         (-2,602,000)
          (Limitation on annual contract authority,                                                                                                                                             
           indefinite)...............................       (-2,000,000)       (-2,000,000)       (-2,000,000)       (-2,000,000)  ...................  ...................  ...................
          (Limitation on direct loans)...............    (1,075,363,000)    (1,084,604,000)    (1,083,746,000)    (1,084,604,000)         (+9,241,000)  ...................           (+858,000)
          (Limitation on guaranteed loans, fiscal                                                                                                                                               
           year 1996)................................  .................   (20,000,000,000)  .................   (20,000,000,000)    (+20,000,000,000)  ...................    (+20,000,000,000)
          (Limitation on guaranteed loans, fiscal                                                                                                                                               
           year 1997)................................  (238,900,000,000)  (239,400,000,000)  (238,900,000,000)  (238,900,000,000)  ...................       (-500,000,000)  ...................
          (Limitation on corporate funds)............      (554,401,000)      (573,683,000)      (559,401,000)      (573,683,000)        (+19,282,000)  ...................        (+14,282,000)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------