objective is to administer and supervise continuing Federal programs and funds provided under the recently enacted Compact of Free Association (P.L. 99-239). The 1987 request totals $283.8 million in comparison to current 1986 appropriations of $219.8 million. However, the 1987 request is a reduction of $197.4 from the current 1986 estimate of $481.3 million, which reflects a requested supplemental appropriation of $270.9 million and sequestration of $9.5 million in budget authority permanently cancelled under P.L. 99-177 (Gram-Rudman-Hollings). The 1987 request for administration of the U.S. Territories is $71.5 million, decrease of $8.3 million from the current 1986 estimate. The request includes $20.7 million for an operations grants to American Samoa (an increase of $1 million) and $9.1 million for construction projects in Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands (a decrease of $5.9 million). Technical assistance funding is proposed at $2.2 million, a decrease of $2.5 million, and loan assistance for the Guam Power Authority will decrease $6.5 million to $1.6 million. The covenant grant for Northern Mariana Islands operations and capital development is proposed to be $35.3 million, an increase of $8.8 million. The budget reflects a policy of encouraging increased private sector participation in territorial development, while enhancing government efficiency and encouraging economic diversification of the islands. An estimated $55 million will be provided to Guam and the Virgin Islands from anticipated Federal collections of income and excise taxes. This payment will be a decrease of $2.4 million from the 1986 estimate of $57.4 million. Approximately $13 million is requested for 1987 to fund the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, which is a decrease of $63.4 million from the 1986 estimate. However, almost all of the decrease is attributable to the fact that funding for the Republic of the Marshall Islands and the FSM is no longer included in this account. The $13 million requested for 1987 will provide $10.6 million for the Republic of Palau (an increase of $0.5 million) and $2.5 million for Trust Territory operations (a decrease of $2.7 million). The budget requests $270.9 million in a 1986 supplemental and $144.3 million in 1987 funding to implement the Compact of Free Association. Approximately $181 million of the 1986 request reflects one-time funding provided during the first year of Compact implementation. Payments under the Compact during 1986 and 1987 are the first two of 15 annual payments to the Marshall Islands and to the FSM that will eventually total approximately $2.3 billion. Secretarial Offices The budget requests for Secretarial offices total $80.7 million. This is a decrease of $0.7 million from the enacted 1986 appropriations for these offices, but an increase of $2.8 million from the current 1986 estimates, which reflect sequestration of $3.5 million under P.L. 99–177. Within the $80.7 million total, the Office of the Secretary, which provides executive direction and management for the Department, is funded at $43.6 million; the Office of the Solicitor, which provides legal services for all components of the Department, at $20.8 million; and the Office of the Inspector General at $16.3 million. Conclusion In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I believe this is a good budget which should be approved by the Congress. This budget fairly meets our responsibilities and does not ignore our pressing needs. It helps put the overall Federal budget on a course of steadily declining deficits leading to a balanced budget. I will be happy to answer any questions that you have at this time. Mr. YATES. All right. You didn't want to comment at all on the Statue of Liberty and Ellis Island. I think perhaps I should lead you into it. Mr. Regula. Mr. REGULA. Before you get to Ellis Island, might I ask a couple of questions? Mr. YATES. Well, of course, you may. Mr. REGULA. I am glad to see you, Mr. Secretary. Mr. YATES. Overall, it is nice to see him. NPS LAND ACQUISITION PRIORITIES AND RESCISSIONS Mr. REGULA. On the proposed rescissions, Mr. Secretary, I would like to know how they were selected. I notice, for example, that neither Big Cypress nor New River Gorge land acquisition monies were proposed for rescission, and yet Cuyahoga Valley National Recreation Area is proposed, Santa Monica is proposed. I would like to know how you arrived at which projects would be proposed and how you arrived at the amounts? Secretary HODEL. My understanding is that the process that was used by the Park Service involved attempting to provide priorities on land acquisition activities and presumably applying its judgment on those priorities in making those proposals. Now as to what the rationale was for setting the priorities, I would have to defer to the Park Service. I would be happy to ask if the budget people have some suggestions. Mr. REGULA. Well, it seems to me that the high priority has to be areas where you have urban encroachment, because they get more expensive rapidly, and I don't know that Big Cypress or New River Gorge are threatened by any urban development, whereas Cuyahoga and Santa Monica are, and, therefore, I don't understand the rationale in that priority choice. Secretary HODEL. I have with me Denis Galvin, the Deputy Director of the Park Service. I would be happy to have him respond. Mr. GALVIN. There are actually two factors that went into putting the land acquisition rescission together. One was the priority list that the Secretary has referred to, which is based on a multiple set of criteria. The second was based on unobligated balances available at the time the rescission was proposed. In some instances, to my recollection, for an example, the Appalachian Trail, we had obligated a significant amount of the 1986 appropriation at the time the rescission was proposed. So in addition to the criteria in the land acquisition list that the Secretary has referred to, we also had the problem of having available balances in certain areas to make up the amount of money that was required for the rescission. Mr. REGULA. Could you provide for the record your priorities on these so that we have them? Mr. GALVIN. Yes. [The information follows:] National Park Service Federal Land Acquisition Proposed Fiscal Year 1987 Priority Priority and park: 1. Acquisition Management. Listing Amount $7,200,000 6,000,000 Mr. REGULA. Of course, we will have to address them, because ultimately it is a policy issue for this committee and Congress, but I ave some quarrel with how you arrived at rescissions and deterinations on the amounts. I think the Chairman has asked you about the grazing fees. I am supportive of the idea of increasing fees for the park entrances, provided those monies go back into maintenance and development in the area, plus, of course, the urban parks, such as Cuyahoga, where you don't have the ability to get fees. MAINTAINING PARK FACILITIES I might ask you, in conjunction with that, we had the PRIP program which did a lot to rehabilitate our facilities in the parks, and the pressures from visitation continue to grow. What do you have in your proposed budget by way of addressing the need to continue developing the facilities or at least maintaining them, both sewage, water, roads, housing and that type of thing? Secretary HODEL. There is some construction money still in the budget because the PRIP program has run its course. In addition, assuming that we obtain the fee proposal, we will have the increased funding that would come through that for the operation and maintenance activities. That, then, becomes a priority setting problem for each superintendent because my understanding is that Director Mott is planning to return a portion of the money directly to the individual unit, not all, because not all parks are equally needy. Mr. REGULA. I understand. Secretary HODEL. The superintendent then, with the money that comes back, could make judgments as to where the priorities are on maintenance and other activities within the park that need to be carried out. Even in this tight budget time, we will be protecting the parks. COMMISSION ON AMERIANS OUTDOORS Now the other thing we have, as you know, is the Commission on Americans Outdoors, which is holding a series of meetings and hearings, and is expected to be reporting back to us by the end of this year. Hopefully that will do for us the kind of thing the Rockefeller Commission did 20 some years ago and give us a picture of what Americans are doing and demanding outdoors. OVERCROWDING PROBLEM IN PARKS My sense, from my visits to the parks last summer, was that our crowding problem is in tiny pockets, that we have other potential high-use areas already there that just aren't receiving the same kind of attention, partly because people don't know about them. Last summer, in fact, several of the parks I visited were down in visitation and were not getting an increase. Now that may have been for all kinds of reasons, but one of them may have been this perception that they are overcrowded. We are talking now about working through the National Park Foundation to try to get a reservation system for the recreational campground areas, because you hesitate to drive 500 miles or 1,000 miles to a national park and arrive there to see a sign that says "Campgrounds full", and mostly that is what I saw last summer. Campgrounds were full, and yet other visitor facilities in the vicinity weren't, and certainly not every night during the season. We are hopeful that we can spread out the usage by a better information process. It wouldn't increase our costs significantly. Basically, we staff the park for the hundred days that it is open, and we know the peak periods will be certain weeks or weekends, but we also have to have people on the payroll through that whole time. We think if we could increase the usage in June and July, that it wouldn't increase our costs having people there only in August or heavily in August. It is a combination of these things. BLM GRAZING FEES Mr. REGULA. I hope you have the same enthusiasm for increasing grazing fees, and we will put that back in too. Secretary HODEL. May I say, when it appeared that Congress was working out a compromise involving a number of different issues relating to grazing rights, and so forth, that without any hesitation 59-327 0-86-2 |