FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS 1983

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 60
• Document Creation Date: December 21, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 12, 2008
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: December 10, 1982
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
97TH CONGRESS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ( REPORT
2d Session t No. 97-959
FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, 1983
DECEMBER 10, 1982.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State
of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. WHITFEN, on behalf of the Committee on Appropriations,
submitted the following
REPORT
[To accompany H.J. Res. 631]
The Committee on Appropriations submits the following report
in explanation of the accompanying House Joint Resolution 631,
making further continuing appropriations until March 15, 1983,
and providing for productive employment.
The Committee on Appropriations has reported twelve of the
thirteen regular annual appropriation bills for fiscal year 1983. The
House has passed eleven of the bills and additional action on re-
maining bills is expected during this session. The Committee has
carefully reviewed the unique circumstances affecting the appropri-
ations process and has analyzed the prospects for further progress
during the balance of this year. To date, three annual appropri-
ations bills for fiscal year 1983 have been enacted. It is hoped that
conferences will be completed on several other bills during the bal-
ance of the second session of the 97th Congress. The Committee be-
lieves that program efficiency and effectiveness is improved when
the uncertainty involved in most continuing appropriations is re-
moved. For this reason, the accompanying joint resolution carries a
termination date of March 15, 1983. It is hoped, of course, that ad-
ditional regular bills will be enacted and thus disengage from the
continuing resolution.
Major. continuing resolutions (providing for nearly the entire gov-
ernment) have been required for the past four fiscal years. The
Committee considers this to be a very undesirable situation from
the standpoint of orderly and effective administration of federal
programs. The Committee reaffirms its strong support for the prin-
ciple of financing federal programs under the traditional authoriza-
tion and appropriation process including individual appropriation
bills. It will continue efforts to get regular annual bills signed into
11-0060
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
2 /
law as soon as possible. Examples of this include the markup in
subcommittee of two regular bills during the week of November
15-two weeks before the Congress reconvened for the post-election
session.
As noted in the Committee's report accompanying the October,
1982 continuing resolution, one of the major contributing factors
which impaired the enactment of regular appropriation bills before
the start of the fiscal year was the delayed adoption of the first
concurrent resolution on the budget. The resolution on the 1983
budget was not adopted by the Congress until June 22. Only 47 leg-
islative days remained from June 22 until the start of the fiscal
year. This compares with 74 legislative days from the start of the
session until adoption of the first budget resolution. In each of the
past four fiscal years, there have been more legislative days from
the start of the session until adoption of the first budget resolution
than from that date to the beginning of the fiscal year. The time-
table set forth in the Budget Act for adoption of the first budget
resolution must be met if the Congress is to avoid major continuing
resolutions. If the first resolution is not adopted by the statutory
date of May 15th, serious consideration should be given to allowing
appropriation bills to proceed anyway.
The Committee also notes that as in previous years, the budget
resolution contained unrealistic outlay estimates and projections
for savings in entitlement programs. This, combined with automati-
cally transforming targets in the first resolution into ceilings in the
second without additional Congressional action (a provision for
which there is no basis in the Budget Act) has resulted in the
outlay ceiling already being exceeded for fiscal year 1983 according
to the scorekeeping procedures employed by the Congressional
Budget Office. This may hinder the Appropriations Committee's
ability to act expeditiously on bills in the new Congress-despite
the fact that the Committee is well within its section 302 alloca-
tions under the budget resolution. The inaccuracy of outlay esti-
mates and the failure to enact entitlement savings-actions over
which the Committee has no control-may again impede the con-
sideration of appropriation bills.
RATE OF OPERATIONS UNDER THE CONTINUING RESOLUTION
The previous continuing resolution for 1983 was generally based
on the status of the individual appropriation bills at the beginning
of the fiscal year on October 1 and was designed to provide interim
financing authority for a relatively short period of time. The ac-
companying resolution provides funding levels for ten appropri-
ations bills, as follows:
1. Programs and activities contained in the Agriculture, Rural
Development and Related Agencies; District of Columbia; Depart-
ment of the Interior and Related Agencies; Department of Trans-
portation and Related Agencies; and Treasury, Postal Service and
General Government Appropriation Bills are provided for at the
lower of the House or Senate rate.
2. Funding for programs and activities contained in the Foreign
Assistance Appropriations Bill is included at the rate contained in
the 1982 Foreign Assistance Appropriations Act. In addition eco-
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M0l 133R000100140002-2
nomic and military assistance for Egypt and Israel is provided at
the level contained in the authorization bill reported by the House
Foreign Affairs Committee, plus $25 million in Foreign Military
Direct Sales for Egypt. There are certain other minor changes.
The Committee directs the Agency for International Develop-
ment to allocate $5 million of the funds available for foreign assist-
ance for the activities of Opportunities Industrialization Centers,
International (OICI), and to report back to the Committee within
thirty days of enactment of this resolution on its plans to imple-
ment this instruction. The Committee finds that OICI's program of
educational and training assistance in Africa has been uniquely
successful in promoting self-help, teaching basic practical skills,
and enabling host countries to rapidly assume full responsibility
for the entire program.
The Committee expresses its grave concern about an adverse de-
velopment involving a major U.S. corporation, which casts doubt
over whether U.S. economic aid, both direct and indirect, provided
to the Government of Pakistan is being effectively used to create a
viable economic climate for private investment by U.S. businesses.
This involves a series of steps which have been taken by the Gov-
ernment of Pakistan that have substantially reduced the economic
viability of a fertilizer plant in Lahore, Pakistan. The Committee
hopes that the Government of Pakistan will review its policies in
this area.
The Congress believes that the current problems with this proj-
ect are a serious issue, which can impact negatively on future U. S.
investment in Pakistan. The Committee has provided direct eco-
nomic assistance to Pakistan, and supported concessional loans to
Pakistan through our representatives to international financial in-
stitutions, in the hope they would help the people of Pakistan by
creating a positive economic environment. The problems in this sit-
uation cast doubt on whether an environment conducive to private
sector investment is being developed. This will be an important
matter for Congress to consider as it reviews assistance levels to
Pakistan next year.
3. Programs, projects and activities contained in the Department
of Defense Appropriation Bills are provided for at the rate passed
by the House of Representatives.
4. Funding for programs and activities contained in the Depart-
ments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education and
Related Agencies Appropriations Bill is provided for at the House
passed rate with certain exceptions listed in the joint resolution.
5. Projects and activities contained in the Energy and Water De-
velopment Appropriations Bill are provided for at the current rate.
6. Programs, projects and activities contained in the Depart-
ments of Commerce, Justice, State, the Judiciary, and Related
Agencies are provided for at the rate as passed the House of Repre-
sentatives with three exceptions.
In addition, the joint resolution provides approximately $9.7 bil-
lion for assisted housing programs as described in detail below.
In certain instances, the previous continuing resolution provided
funds for programs for the entire fiscal year. Where the Committee
did not intend to provide additional funding for those programs in
this resolution, it has specifically set forth the exceptions. For ex-
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M0l 133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
4
ample, the Interstate Transfer Grants activities of the Department
of Transportation received full year funding under Public Law 97-
276. No additional funding for these activities is made available
under the provisions of section 101(a) of this resolution.
HOUSING PROGRAMS
When the Committee reported the fiscal year 1983 HUD-Inde-
pendent Agencies Appropriation Bill, it deferred action on four ac-
counts which comprise the principal thrust of the subsidized hous-
ing programs. Those accounts are:
1. Annual contributions for assisted housing;
2. Rent supplement (rescission of indefinite contract authority);
3. Low-rent public housing-loans and other expenses (by trans-
fer); and
4. Government National Mortgage Association-Special Assist-
ance Functions Fund (Ginnie Mae Tandem Program).
Consideration of these accounts was deferred pending the out-
come of significant new housing authorization legislation. It was
expected that this legislation would mold new subsidized housing
programs and set levels for the continuation of existing programs.
However, such legislation has not to date been enacted.
In view of this, the Committee now believes it must proceed with
a minimum level of funding for various housing programs in fiscal
year 1983. Therefore, the Committee has included within this joint
resolution recommendations covering the above four deferred ac-
counts.
After the 1983 HUD-Independent Agencies Appropriation Bill
was signed into law on September 30, 1982, there remained ap-
proximately $9,700,000,000 of Section 302(b) allocation to the HUD
Subcommittee. That allocation has been reserved for the assisted
housing programs. The Committee recommends the full use of
these funds and has put special emphasis on those programs which
will generate additional jobs in as short a time as possible. For ex-
ample, a total of $2,500,000,000 is recommended for the moderniza-
tion of low-rent public housing projects. Many of these dollars will
be allocated to cities with the highest levels of unemployment-al-
though the funds will be distributed throughout the country to a
potential of over 2,500 housing authorities. Through the compre-
hensive modernization program, which is administered by the De-
partment, thousands of units of public housing which have severely
deteriorated, or have been damaged by vandals, can be restored to
sound housing units in a relatively short period of time. The rules
and regulations for this program already exist, and it is expected
that the Department can allocate these monies within four to six
weeks after the enactment of this legislation.
The Committee has also included funding for 10,700 new and
substantially rehabilitated public housing units. This represents
the only thrust in fiscal year 1983 to build new subsidized housing
units that will primarily serve low and moderate income families.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
An additional allocation of 10,000 Section 8 reservations has been
set aside to "piggy-back" on top of the corresponding 10,000 units
made available in the 1983 HUD Act for the Section 202 housing
for the elderly and handicapped program.
The joint resolution also includes funding for an additional
47,270 Section 8 existing units and 15,000 moderate rehabilitation
units. The Section 8 existing program is particularly helpful in pro-
viding shelter for low-income families. Coupled with the recom-
mended 15,000 units for moderate rehabilitation, the 1983 proposal
will help house more than 62,000 additional recipients.
Language has been included in this joint resolution that removes
earmarkings carried in previous appropriations acts for different
components of the assisted housing program. While the Committee
has included this language to facilitate administration of the assist-
ed housing programs, it expects the Department to continue using,
until January 1, 1983, the estimated $1,300,000,000 carried forward
from 1982 for financial adjustment to projects in the pipeline.
In summary, then, the Committee's recommendation represents
a minimum level of support for subsidized housing programs in
1983. The fact is this funding commitment represents only one-
third the level carried in fiscal year 1980. Many government pro-
grams have been reduced or curtailed-but clearly the housing pro-
grams have suffered more severely than most. The following table
outlines the Committee's recommendations in detail:
Per unit Contract authority Term Budget authority
cost
Authority available:
Carryover balance ......................................................... NA NA $161,570,352 NA $1,590,358,901
Deferred authority ......................................................... NA NA ............................ NA 750,041,632
Recaptures .................................................................... NA NA 196,000,000 NA 4,000,000,000
Permanent authority ...................................................... NA NA 30,257,264 NA 30,257,264
New authority ............................................................... NA NA 485,114,257 NA 9,686,630,000
Total, available ......................................................... NA NA 872,941,813 NA 16,057,287,797
Use of authority:
Public housing:
New and Sub. rehab ............................................ 10,700 $5,530 59,171,000 30 1,775,130,000
Amendments ........................................................ NA NA 17,000,000 NA 532,000,000
Interest rate adjustment ...................................... NA NA 19,652,200 NA 655,000,000
Indians ................................................................. 1,000 6,460 6,460,000 28 180,880,000
Leased amendments ............................................. NA NA 23,800,000 1 23,800,000
Modernization:
From new authority .................................... NA NA 125,000,000 20 2,500,000,000
Sub. rehab. set-aside .................................. NA NA 4,466,086 20 89,321,727
Subtotal, public housing ......................... 11,700 NA 255,549,286 NA 5,156,131,727
Section 8:
Amendments:
New, sub. rehab ......................................... NA NA 43,600,000 23 1,048,000,000
Existing ....................................................... NA NA 20,792,860 10 208,160,160
Loan management ....................................... NA NA 15,000,000 15 150,000,000
New-Sub. rehab: Section 202 .............................. 10,000 6,500 65,000,000 20 1,300,000,000
Property disposition .............................................. 10,000 4,560 45,600,000 15 684,000,000
Conversions:
Section 23 .................................................. 5,000 2,820 14,100,000 15 211,500,000
Rent supplement/RAP ................................. 60,000 2,730 163,800,000 15 2,457,000,000
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85MO1133R000100140002-2
Units
Per cost unit
Contract authority
Term
Budget authority
Existing ................................................................
47,270
3,755
177,499,727
15
2,662,495,910
Moderate rehab ....................................................
15,000
4,800
72,000,000
15
1,080,000,000
Subtotal section 8 ...........................................
147,270
NA
617,392,587
NA
9,801,156,070
Ginnie Mae: Targeted tandem (firm commit-
ments) ............................................................
10,196
NA
NA
NA
500,000,000
In connection with the $2,500,000,000 provided for public housing
modernization, the Committee has been made aware of a serious
problem confronting a number of public housing authorities. This
problem has arisen because selected public housing authorities
have found that although substantial development money for new
public housing has been allocated in the past-too often the most
urgent needs are in the modernization program. Complicating the
problem is the fact that the Department has notified various public
housing authorities that funds provided for a new project may not
be transferred to another new project if the former is unable to go
to construction and may not be converted to modernization work.
This prohibition results in the recapture of public housing develop-
ment funds. The St. Louis public housing authority, for example,
will lose $8,500,000 of monies made available for new public hous-
ing, which cannot be used for that purpose, but which could be
used to restore one of its largest public housing projects.
The Committee strongly urges the Department to make available
from within the $2,500,000,000 sufficient monies to those public
housing authorities which have had development monies recap-
tured-and that can make use of such funds within 12 months.
The Committee has also been made aware of a number of prob-
lems in connection with the Section 202 housing for the elderly and
handicapped program. First, it has been reported that there has
been a marked reduction in the proportion of minority sponsors se-
lected for the Section 202 program. Because minority sponsors are
a major vehicle by which minority builders and professionals have
an opportunity to participate in HUD programs, this decline is a
matter of special concern to the Committee. It is expected that the
Department will review its Section 202 sponsor selection process
and identify the cause of this decline in selection of minority spon-
sors and report such cause to the Committee as soon as possible.
Also, the Section 202 program is beset by delay in the allocation
of funds. Although these monies are made available at the begin-
ning of the fiscal year, the actual allocation of the monies is often
not made until nearly the end of the same fiscal year. The Commit-
tee urges the Department to improve the processing time for Sec-
tion 202 allocations so that these units may move to completion as
soon as possible.
Finally, in the Section 202 program, it has been learned that the
cost estimate per unit carried in the fiscal year 1983 budget may be
too low. The Committee recognizes that this cost per unit is based
on assumptions concerning the potential containment of Section
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
202 costs. However, those assumptions may not prove accurate and
the Department is expected to reflect the true cost per unit of Sec-
tion 202 housing in the 1984 budget.
RENT SUPPLEMENT (RESCISSION)
The 1983 budget requests the rescission of up to $105,160,000 in
contract authority and $2,830,360,000 in budget authority under
the rent supplement program. The proposed rescission represents
balances of authority available as a result of the planned conver-
sion of 60,000 rent supplement units to section 8 in fiscal year 1983.
The Committee recommends the proposed rescission of up to
$105,160,000 in contract authority and $2,830,360,000 in budget au-
thority.
In rescinding rent supplement monies, the Committee reaffirms
the government's obligation to the tenants and owners of projects,
whether the projects are secured by mortgages insured by the Fed-
eral Housing Administration or are financed without FHA insur-
ance under a state or local program providing assistance through
loans, loan insurance or tax abatements, to fund all necessary in-
creases in subsidy necessitated by increased rents. The Committee
understands there have been some funding problems with regard
to these programs and directs the Department to fully carry out
the government commitment to the low income tenants and owners
of these projects.
LOW-RENT PUBLIC HOUSING-LOANS AND OTHER EXPENSES
The low-rent public housing loan fund provides Federal financing
for the construction, acquisition, or modernization of public hous-
ing projects until the projects can be financed in the private
market with short-term tax exempt notes and in the long-term
market through the sale of investments to the Federal Financing
Bank (FFB). Although funds to make debt service payments on tax-
exempt bonds and notes are provided from the housing payments
appropriation, additional payments are required to cover the differ-
ential between tax-exempt bonds with interest set at an artificially
low 6.625 percent rate and bonds sold to the FFB at a federally-
taxable interest rate.
The budget proposes appropriation language for 1983 to transfer
$1,400,000,000 of unobligated budget authority from the annual
contributions for assisted housing account to the low-rent public
housing loan fund account. Included in the request are the neces-
sary funds to make payments to the FFB. The proposed transfer is
expected to support estimated sales to the FFB of $1,485,000,000.
The Committee does not approve the proposed transfer. The pro-
posed level of public housing commitments does not appear to put
the Department in the position of exceeding the $20,000,000,000
limitation for the loan fund.
GOVERNMENT NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION
SPECIAL ASSISTANCE FUNCTIONS FUND
The Committee recommends $500,000,000 of mortgage purchase
authority for the Section 8 and targeted tandem programs in fiscal
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85MO1133R000100140002-2
year 1983. The special assistance functions program provides fi-
nancing for selected types of FHA-insured and VA-guaranteed
mortgages as a means of stimulating mortgage lending and build-
ing activities when credit conditions so warrant.
Of the total amount recommended, $350,000,000 is for the target-
ed tandem program. This authority will provide assistance for
more than 7,000 units of unsubsidized housing located in cities and
counties which meet the physical and economic criteria of the
urban development action grant program. It is the Committee's in-
tention that the targeted tandem authority be distributed on the
basis of the chronological firm commitment date.
The remaining $150,000,000 is for Section 8 projects where not
all units receive a subsidy, the so-called "20 percent" projects. This
mortgage purchase authority will assist approximately 3,000 units.
The Section 8 tandem authority is to be distributed on a lottery
basis.
Again, these funds will create construction jobs in as short a
time as possible. The projects are ready, for the most part, to go to
construction in the next three to six months. In this connection,
the Committee directs the Department to allocate the $500,000,000
included herein within 30 days of enactment of this joint resolu-
tion. It is expected that this level of funding will generate approxi-
mately 15,000 jobs.
INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION
ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISION
(Including transfer of funds)
Since 1978, the Committee has encouraged the Veterans Admin-
istration to conduct a serious inquiry into the use of automatic
data processing within the Agency s medical center network. While
the balance of the health care industry, particularly in acute care
hospitals, has seen rapid expansion in the experimentation with
and operation of various functional and integrated systems within
hospital clinic support and patient care areas, the VA has strug-
gled to evaluate its own needs without making much discernable
progress. The conference report on the fiscal year 1981 appropri-
ations bill outlined the problem:
. The Veterans Administration has been studying the
need for patient care computer support in the hospital and
medical center environment for several years without
reaching any apparent resolution. There is uncertainty
about the potential benefits and cost-effectiveness of the
various approaches available.
The conferees then directed that the VA take action:
... VA should first determine which of the available
functional (such as patient scheduling) or integrated
(which combines functional applications into a hospital-
wide system) technologies would be most cost-effective and
of maximum value to the agency's vast medical center net-
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M0l 133R000100140002-2
work. This program should be well documented and
planned but should utilize current off-the-shelf technology
(which includes both currently operating VA medical
center systems and commercially available systems),
rather than embarking on a course of action that may
take a decade or more to come to fruition.
During the past several years various Congressional inquiries
and reports have added emphasis to this problem. Repeatedly the
guidance has been clear, i.e., the Veterans Administration should
move deliberately to place available, off-the-shelf ADP technology
into the medical centers in order to take full advantage of their
health care expertise and to maximize benefits to the Nation's vet-
erans of patient care medical information systems. In February
1982, a VA executive order indicated that MUMPS (a computer
language developed at Massachusetts General Hospital for medical
care computer applications) programmed, decentralized mini-com-
puter systems would be installed at medical centers offering sever-
al previously developed patient care applications (Admissions, Dis-
charges, and Transfers; Scheduling; Laboratory; and Pharmacy). In
issuing this executive order, the VA stated that this course of
action was consistent with the longstanding intention to. evaluate
various approaches in the utilization of available technology. This
plan also stated that any further development of the APPLES/en-
hanced outpatient pharmacy system would be terminated. The
APPLES system is a routine outpatient pharmacy computer appli-
cation that grew out of a computer program successfully operated
in several Los Angeles area hospitals.
In the meantime, the Committee has learned that an entirely
new effort has been initiated at VA to develop an integrated hospi-
tal-wide information system, the so-called Computerized Medical
Information Support System (COMISS). This new system incorpo-
rates APPLES but represents a major extension and is a conceptu-
al departure from APPLES. COMISS is being designed to accom-
plish much the same workload currently handled by or planned for
the Department of Medicine and Surgery (DM&S) developed
MUMPS system. It is also conceptually and technically redundant
with systems and computer applications which have operated
throughout the health care industry for several years. Thus, there
are two systems within the agency which are seemingly aimed at
the same workload. This situation is creating a great deal of inter-
nal frustration within the Agency and especially with the medical
staff who have watched their counterparts in the health care in-
dustry far outstrip VA's progress in the application of this technol-
ogy in the patient care setting. With two groups within the VA bu-
reaucracy, the Office of Data Management and Telecommunica-
tions (ODM&T) and DM&S, trying to outdo each other in develop-
ing a satisfactory system, there is uncertainty, duplicative cost, a
major waste of expert staff resources, a great deal of bureaucratic
infighting, and most importantly a situation that, if not dealt with
promptly, will result in further delay in deriving the benefits of
this technology.
Therefore, this joint resolution contains a provision which directs
the VA to immediately cease all expenditures for any further de-
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M0l 133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
velopment or deployment of COMISS, except that the agency has
the option to continue the operation and maintenance of the
APPLES/enhanced outpatient pharmacy system but only at the
Minneapolis/St. Paul, Chicago and Los Angeles area sites where it
is now installed. Further, the staff year resources now assigned to
COMISS are transferred to the DM&S appropriation. The reduc-
tion of 52 full time equivalent ODM&T staff years reflects an an-
nualized reduction of 69 positions. These staff resources and
$1,000,000 previously appropriated to the general operating ex-
penses account are transferred to DM&S to support the decentral-
ized hospital computer program. The language also lifts the
$35,000,000 limitation on medical computer systems that had been
placed in P.L. 97-272.
These actions will allow the agency to proceed with its planned
Phase I and Phase II MUMPS installations, and to continue its
evaluation of other off-the-shelf systems that have been operating
throughout the health care industry for many years. In carrying
out the Phase I and Phase II plan, first priority should be given to
the special needs of the Cleveland and Minneapolis-St. Paul medi-
cal centers.
The Committee believes that DM&S and ODM&T must work
closely together to ensure the successful installation of this tech-
nology and to maintain its effectiveness. ODM&T is in a position to
provide important assistance to DM&S, who clearly must have the
major responsibility for the program. ODM&T should provide sup-
port in standards development and administration, including data
element dictionaries, etc., technical systems analysis and program-
ming assistance, ADP procurement expertise, and so forth.
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Section 124 limits the use of appropriated funds for executing a
modified contractual arrangement for the NASA tracking and data
relay satellite system. The Committee intends by this provision to
prohibit, without prior approval, NASA from entering into a con-
tract of this type differing from the arrangement described to the
Committee earlier this month. The language also prohibits the Ad-
ministrator of NASA from exceeding both the total cost of TDRSS
and the cost of restructuring the existing contract to specific
amounts without the approval of the Committees on Appropri-
ations.
SELECTED MAJOR FEATURES
The resolution provides for the continuation of the existing provi-
sions of law prohibiting federally funded abortions, and the prohibi-
tion against preventing the implementation of programs of volun-
tary prayer and meditation in the public schools. These provisions
would remain effective during the period of the continuing resolu-
tion.
The joint resolution before the Committee continued the pay cap
on salaries of executive employees, including Members of Congress.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
In considering this resolution, the Committee, by majority vote,
voted to allow the House to decide the question of executive salary
cost-of-living adjustments, including Members of Congress. That
does not mean, however, that the Committee intends that these
senior officials take all due retroactive cost of living increases re-
ceived by all other federal workers. The Committee simply means
to provide notice that the issue will be dealt with when the resolu-
tion is brought before the House. It is intended that the House will
deal with this issue, with advance notice, in an open manner which
will allow the House to vote up or down, and it fully expects that
some sort of pay limitation will be reimposed.
COLLEGE HOUSING LOAN PROGRAM
The need for colleges and universities to become more efficient in
the use of energy is growing as energy costs rise. The Committee
continues to support energy conservation projects among the Na-
tion's colleges and universities. The Committee encourages the De-
partment of Education to make available to recipients of energy
loans awarded for capital projects for central heating or cooling the
option of placing these loans on the same repayment schedule as
housing loans, as an incentive to energy conservation and reason-
able room charges.
From funds available the Corps of Engineers is directed to allo-
cate $1,500,000 for the Miami Harbor Bay Front Park, Florida. The
Committee intends to fully fund the Bay Front Park project in
Miami, Florida in subsequent years to an amount that is equal to
the appraised value of the land that will be deeded to the Corps of
Engineers by the City of Miami for the project.
The Committee recognizes the importance of import specialists
presently stationed at San Antonio, Texas and directs that any
plans to relocate import specialists from San Antonio, Texas, to
Laredo, Texas, not be implemented.
It is the Committee's intention that none of the funds provided
in this Act are to be used by the United States Customs Service to
collect inspection and/or clearance fees on commercial aircraft as
outlined in the proposed amendment to Part 6, Customs Regula-
tions (19 CFR, Part 6), adding a new section 6.26 establishing a
schedule for commercial aircraft fees. For policy reasons, the Com-
mittee is not in agreement with this proposal, and directs that it be
vacated.
TITLE II-MEETING OUR ECONOMIC PROBLEMS WITH
ESSENTIAL PRODUCTIVE JOBS
The House Appropriations Committee met on Friday, December
10, 1982, to consider the grave unemployment situation prevalent
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
throughout the economy and adopted a separate title to this con-
tinuing resolution dealing with Emergency Jobs Stimulus.
The Committee recognizes that for the long-term recovery of the
economy of the Nation, including the productive employment of
our unemployed workers, the major challenge confronting us is to
take such action as is necessary to restore industrial capacity, stim-
ulate business activity, increase production, and sell American
products in foreign markets. These are just a few of the many fac-
tors to be considered and which must be dealt with as we consider
creative solutions to these problems. In many cases industry is
faced with problems in raising needed capital, others may need an
extension of existing debt, and everyone throughout the economy,
both the private and business sector, needs reasonable and stable
interest rates.
Last spring, the Committee directed the General Accounting
Office to study the policies of the Federal Reserve Board, with spe-
cific attention toward the factors which led to a rise in the interest
rates over the past year. Since the study began, the interest rate
rise has moderated and actually begun to decline.
The Committee recognizes that government jobs alone cannot
solve this severe problem. At the same time the Committee recog-
nizes that it is the strength of the material wealth of the Nation,
along with the support of our financial institutions, that will turn
the corner of this financial crisis and return us to the road of pros-
perity.
In proposing this legislation, the Committee endorses the follow-
ing findings relevant to the crisis facing our economy today:
Section 201. The Congress finds that unemployment has in-
creased to 10.8 per centum on a national basis, reaching a national
high of 17.2 per centum in the State of Michigan. Actual filings of
business related bankruptcies for the year ending June 30, 1982
reached a total of 77,503 as compared with a prior year figure of
66,332 and business failures, as reported by Dunn and Bradstreet is
up 49 per centum as compared to one year ago. Only 35.7 per
centum of. the raw domestic steel industry's capacity is currently
being utilized which represents the lowest capacity since 1932. The
American farmer is more than $200 billion in debt, financed at
rates ranging between 15 and 20 per centum, with higher costs and
lower prices. The Trade Adjustment Assistance Administration of
the Department of Labor has certified that 510,000 are unemployed
as a result of foreign automobile imports. During the 1975 reces-
sion approximately 76 per centum of unemployed workers were
covered by some form of unemployment benefit and today only 49
per centum are currently covered. Long-term economic stability
can only be achieved through the private sector when existing Fed-
eral domestic and foreign policies are inadequate to provide means
for the recovery of major and minor industries, of large and small
businesses, or of United States Agricultural production, which is
being held off world markets by refusing to sell at competitive
prices. Today every possible means must be made to increase
American production and to sell American, instead of continuing to
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M0l 133R000100140002-2
make competitors out of customers. The current unacceptable level
of unemployment which has not existed since the Great Depression
prior to World War II creates an economic and humanitarian prob-
lem too serious to ignore. A strong and viable economy is an essen-
tial ingredient of our national security and the efforts to increase
our military capability and readiness. Unemployment compensa-
tion has reached an annual rate of over $20 billion, and now hun-
dreds of thousands of workers have exhausted the period of time
for which they are entitled to draw unemployment compensation.
At a time when the material wealth of the nation is being allowed
to deteriorate in the watersheds, rivers and harbors, in the interest
of the nation immediate steps should be taken to retain and restore
our physical wealth. It is essential that interest rates, which have
been reduced following a GAO investigation of the Federal Reserve
System at the request of the Committee, continue at present or
lower rates for industrial and agricultural recovery.
Section 202. The appropriate Committees of the Congress are di-
rected to study the current economic crisis with specific emphasis
on long-term recovery, and on a strong private sector based on a
cooperative government/industry partnership. These findings are
to be presented to the respective Houses of the Congress by no
later than March 15, 1983 for appropriate action.
Section 203. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve and
the Federal Open Market Committee should take such actions as
are necessary to achieve and maintain a level of interest rates low
enough to generate significant economic growth and thereby
reduce the current intolerable level of unemployment.
There is no longer any doubt that the economic situation in this
country is bad, and without some change in course, will get worse.
There exists in the country today a national tragedy of unemploy-
ment. Over 12 million people are currently unemployed, our pro-
ductive plant capacity has reached its postwar low, thousands of
our nation's families are without adequate food or shelter, and the
morale of our nation has reached a real state of depression.
The Federal government has a responsibility to its people and
the future wealth of our country. We must help the helpless, and
rebuild the decaying roads, harbors, cities, and public parks. The
government must increase our national wealth by assisting in the
expansion of essential public works by providing jobs for people
and industry. In addition we must assist investment in the private
sector and develop a cooperative spirit of investment in our future.
The country is in a state of economic emergency reminiscent of
the darkest days of the Great Depression. We have been in a severe
recession for about a year. Real gross national product showed a
cumulative decline of nearly 2.5 percent. This process of decline
proceeded at its fastest pace in the fourth quarter of 1981 and the
first quarter of 1982 with output falling at about a 4 percent
annual rate.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M0l 133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85MO1133R000100140002-2
14
This recession has pushed unemployment to record levels. The
unemployment rate has climbed from 7.2 percent in July of 1981 to
10.8 percent in November of 1982; the latter is the highest jobless
rate recorded in the postwar period. This means that almost 12
million persons are currently jobless. The Congressional Budget
Office estimates that each one percent increase in unemployment
adds $25-$30 billion to the federal deficit because of lost tax rev-
enues and increased expenditures for unemployment compensation,
welfare payments and other public assistance. About 5.6 million
people are currently drawing unemployment benefits, an increase
of 2.4 million, or 75 percent over the same time one year ago.
About 2.2 million people have exhausted all entitlement to benefits
since the beginning of the year. This undoubtedly will be a growing
problem in the months ahead.
The severity of the recession is also evident in other measures of
the economy. After-tax corporate profits have fallen to their lowest
level in over five years. The number of business failures has in-
creased substantially. Dun and Bradstreet, Inc. recently reported
that bankruptcies during the first half of 1982 exceeded the total in
all of 1980, and were 45 percent ahead of the first six months of
1981. The housing and automobile industries have been particular-
ly hard hit with production rates plummeting to extreme lows. In-
comes in the farming sector have also been severely affected, fall-
ing from about $27 billion in the third quarter of 1981 to about $15
billion in the second quarter of 1982.
A particularly troublesome aspect of the current economic slide
is the persistence of unusually high levels of interest rates. After
four quarters of recession the prime rate has fallen only moderate-
ly. These high interest levels have no doubt added to the severity of
the recession, pushing down hard on housing and automobile sales
and adding significantly to the swelling tide of business and farm
bankruptcies. A continuance of high rates is feared which will lead
to a very slow-paced recovery over the next several quarters.
UNEMPLOYMENT RATES FOR SELECTED LABOR FORCE GROUPS, NOVEMBER 1981 AND NOVEMBER
1982, SEASONALLY ADJUSTED
[In percent]
Men, 20 years and over ..................................................................................................................
7.1
10.1
Women, 20 years and over ..............................................................................................................
7.2
9.1
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years .............................................................................................................
21.4
24.2
White workers ..................................................................................................................................
7.4
9.7
Men, 20 years and over .........................................................................................................
6.4
9.2
Women, 20 years and over .....................................................................................................
6.3
8.0
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years ....................................................................................................
19.0
21.3
Black workers ..................................................................................................................................
16.8
20.2
Men, 20 years and over .........................................................................................................
15.5
19.0
Women, 20 years and over .....................................................................................................
13.6
16.7
Both sexes, 16 to 19 years ....................................................................................................
44.1
50.1
Hispanic origin .................................................................................................................................
11.5
15.7
Married men ....................................................................................................................................
5.2
1.7
Married women ................................................................................................................................
6.5
8.4
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
UNEMPLOYMENT RATES FOR SELECTED LABOR FORCE GROUPS, NOVEMBER 1981 AND NOVEMBER
1982, SEASONALLY ADJUSTED-Continued
[In percent]
Women who maintain families .........................................................................................................
10.8
12.5
Full-time workers .............................................................................................................................
8.1
10.7
Unemployed 15 weeks or more .......................................................................................................
2.2
4.1
UNEMPLOYMENT RATES BY INDUSTRY, NOVEMBER 1981 AND NOVEMBER 1982, SEASONALLY
ADJUSTED
[In percent]
Total ..................................................................................................................................
8.3
10.8
Mining .............................................................................................................................................
7.3
18.0
Construction ....................................................................................................................................
17.8
21.9
Manufacturing .................................................................................................................................
9.4
14.8
Durable goods ........................................................................................................................
9.5
17.1
Lumber and wood products ............................................................................................
20.1
20.4
Furniture and fixtures ....................................................................................................
10.7
15.6
Stone, clay, and glass products .....................................................................................
8.4
17.7
Primary metal products ..................................................................................................
11.1
26.0
Fabricated metal products ..............................................................................................
11.0
18.8
Machinery, except electrical ...........................................................................................
6.1
16.2
Electrical equipment .......................................................................................................
8.2
13.1
Transportation equipment ...............................................................................................
11.0
17.6
Automobiles ..........................................................................................................
15.7
24.1
Other transportation equipment ............................................................................
5.7
11.2
Nondurable goods ....................................................................................................................
9.3
11.4
Food and kindred products .............................................................................................
11.1
13.1
Textile mill products ......................................................................................................
13.9
11.7
Apparel and other textile products .................................................................................
11.5
15.5
Printing and publishing ..................................................................................................
4.7
7.0
Chemicals and allied products ........................................................................................
6.0
8.5
Rubber and plastics products .........................................................................................
10.9
11.8
Petroleum and coal products .........................................................................................
4.9
4.6
Transportation and public utilities ...........................................................................................
5.5
8.7
Wholesale and retail trade ......................................................................................................
8.6
10.5
Finance, insurance, and real estate ........................................................................................
3.5
6.0
Services ..................................................................................................................................
6.9
8.2
Private households .........................................................................................................
5.7
7.7
Other service industries .................................................................................................
7.0
8.2
Agricultural wage and salary workers .....................................................................................
14.1
15.9
Government workers ...............................................................................................................
5.2
5.2
Note.-Seasonally adjusted data are not available for instruments and related products, paper and allied products, and tobacco manufactures.
Source: U.S Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, December 1982.
September 1981
August 1982
September 1982
(Preliminary)
Alabama ...............................................................................................................
10.2
14.3
14.3
Birmingham .................................................................................................
10.2
14.6
14.6
Huntsville ....................................................................................................
9.7
11.4
11.8
Mobile .........................................................................................................
9.4
14.5
14.5
Montgomery ................................................................................................
9.3
12.2
11.3
Tuscaloosa ...................................................................................................
9.2
12.1
11.1
Alaska ..................................................................................................................
7.9
8.3
7.7
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
September 1981
August 1982
Se tember 1982
(PPreliminary)
Arizona .................................................................................................................
6.0
11.2
10.7
Phoenix .......................................................................................................
5.0
8.5
8.4
Tucson ........................................................................................................
5.0
10.4
10.1
Arkansas ................................................................................................._...........
7.9
9.8
9.4
Fayetteville-Springdale .................................................................................
4.1
7.8
7.3
Fort Smith 1 ...............................................................................................
8.4
10.6
10.2
Little Rock-North Little Rock .......................................................................
7.3
8.1
7.9
Pine Bluff ....................................................................................................
9.4
11.0
10.9
California 2 ..........................................................................................................
7.0
10.2
9.7
Anaheim-Santa Ana-Garden Grove ...............................................................
4.5
7.9
7.2
Bakersfield ..................................................................................................
8.0
12.6
12.6
Fresno .........................................................................................................
7.7
12.3
10.4
Los Angeles-Long Beach 2 ..........................................................................
7.3
9.1
9.4
Modesto ......................................................................................................
9.8
15.0
13.2
Oxnard-Simi Valley-Ventura .........................................................................
8.1
13.0
12.1
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario ................................................................
8.5
14.1
13.1
Sacramento .................................................................................................
7.5
11.3
10.3
Salinas-Seaside-Monterey ............................................................................
6.9
9.3
9.0
San Diego ...................................................................................................
6.9
11.0
10.5
San Francisco-Oakland ................................................................................
5.7
8.8
8.1
San Jose .....................................................................................................
5.9
7.8
7.5
Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Lompoc ............................................................
5.5
7.9
7.7
Santa Rosa ..................................................................................................
6.9
10.6
9.5
Stockton ......................................................................................................
8.3
13.8
11.8
Vallejo-Fairfield-Napa ...................................................................................
7.1
11.2
10.2
Colorado ...............................................................................................................
4.9
7.2
1.6
Denver-Boulder ............................................................................................
4.6
6.4
6.8
Connecticut ..........................................................................................................
5.6
6.6
6.5
Bridgeport ...................................................................................................
5.6
7.4
7.6
Hartford ......................................................................................................
5.2
6.3
6.3
New Britain .................................................................................................
6.5
9.3
8.4
New Haven-West Haven ..............................................................................
6.1
6.4
6.2
Stamford .....................................................................................................
3.9
3.5
3.5
Waterbury ...................................................................................................
6.4
8.1
8.2
Delaware ..............................................................................................................
6.9
10.0
8.0
Wilmington ' ..............................................................................................
6.9
11.1
8.5
District of Columbia .............................................................................................
9.7
11.0
10.7
Washington SMSA r ...................................................................................
5.3
6.0
5.8
Florida 2 ...............................................................................................................
8.1
1.8
8.2
Daytona Beach ............................................................................................
7.2
6.1
6.2
Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood ..........................................................................
6.2
6.5
1.0
Fort Mayers-Cape Coral ...............................................................................
6.5
7.7
7.9
Gainesville ...................................................................................................
4.7
4.0
4.9
Jacksonville .................................................................................................
7.5
6.2
1.4
Lakeland-Winter Haven ...............................................................................
17.5
19.1
17.4
Melbourne-Titusville-Cocoa ...........................................................................
9.2
7.5
7.8
Miami ..........................................................................................................
7.8
7.7
8.3
Orlando .......................................................................................................
8.0
6.4
7.0
Pensacola., ..................................................................................................
6.8
6.3
7.3
Sarasota ......................................................................................................
6.4
7.0
7.1
Tallahassee ..................................................................................................
5.2
4.9
4.1
Tampa-St. Petersburg ..................................................................................
7.0
7.0
7.4
West Palm Beach-Boca Raton ....................................................................
9.0
9.0
9.0
Georgia .................................................................................................................
6.2
7.5
7.5
Albany ....................................................................; ....................................
8.1
9.3
9.2
Atlanta ........................................................................................................
5.5
6.1
6.3
Augusta .......................................................................................................
8.6
9.0
10.4
Columbus I .................................................................................................
8.5
9.5
9.4
Macon .........................................................................................................
6.1
6.6
6.9
Savannah ....................................................................................................
6.1
7.7
7.5
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
September 1981
August 1982
September 1982
(Preliminary)
Hawaii ..................................................................................................................
5.7
7.6
7.9
Honolulu ......................................................................................................
5.4
7.0
7.1
Idaho ....................................................................................................................
6.3
8.9
7.7
Boise City ...................................................................................................
5.0
6.5
6.0
Illinois 2 ..............................................................................................................
8.0
11.4
12.1
Bloomington-Normal ....................................................................................
5.2
9.1
8.9
Champaign-Urbana-Rantoul ..........................................................................
5.1
7.9
7.4
Chicago .......................................................................................................
8.0
10.6
11.3
Davenport-Rock Island-Moline 1 ..................................................................
8.4
13.9
15.8
Decatur .......................................................................................................
10.5
20.0
16.9
Kankakee ....................................................................................................
11.5
16.3
17.2
Peoria ..........................................................................................................
6.9
14.9
15.9
Rockford ......................................................................................................
8.9
18.5
17.0
Springfield ...................................................................................................
6.1
6.7
7.7
Indiana .................................................................................................................
9.1
11.1
11.4
Anderson .....................................................................................................
11.5
13.5
12.9
Elkhart ........................................................................................................
8.2
9.9
9.5
Evansville, ..................................................................................................
8.7
(3)
(3)
Fort Wayne .................................................................................................
8.6
11.1
12.8
Gary-Hammond-East Chicago .......................................................................
10.4
15.0
15.6
Indianapolis .................................................................................................
8.4
9.1
9.0
Lafayette-West Lafayette .............................................................................
6.3
8.8
8.4
Muncie ........................................................................................................
11.1
13.3
13.1
South Bend .................................................................................................
8.0
9.2
9.7
Terre Haute .................................................................................................
8.8
11.4
11.3
Iowa .....................................................................................................................
5.9
8.3
7.7
Cedar Rapids ...............................................................................................
7.3
10.9
10.2
Des Moines .................................................................................................
6.5
8.4
1.7
Dubuque ......................................................................................................
8.7
14.7
13.7
Sioux City 1 ................................................................................................
6.8
8.7
7.7
Waterloo-Cedar Fall .....................................................................................
7.4
11.1
10.5
Kansas .................................................................................................................
3.9
7.1
7.1
Lawrence .....................................................................................................
4.6
5.5
4.9
Topeka ........................................................................................................
5.2
6.8
7.2
Wichita ........................................................................................................
3.9
11.5
10.8
Kentucky ..............................................................................................................
6.9
10.9
10.6
Lexington-Fayette ........................................................................................
4.5
(3)
(3 )
Louisville' ..................................................................................................
7.4
(3)
(3)
Owensboro ..................................................................................................
6.4
(3)
(3)
Louisiana .............................................................................................................
7.9
11.2
10.6
Alexandria ...................................................................................................
10.0
11.4
10.8
Baton Rouge ...............................................................................................
7.6
10.3
9.6
Lafayette .....................................................................................................
4.4
6.1
5.8
Lake Charles ...............................................................................................
8.8
15.8
14.5
Monroe ........................................................................................................
9.7
13.6
12.0
New Orleans ...............................................................................................
7.7
10.1
9.6
Shreveport ...................................................................................................
7.6
10.6
9.9
Maine ...................................................................................................................
6.3
7.6
7.5
Lewistown-Auburn .......................................................................................
7.4
8.9
8.7
Portland ......................................................................................................
5.0
5.7
5.7
Maryland ..............................................................................................................
7.0
8.6
8.1
Baltimore ....................................................................................................
8.2
10.0
9.7
Massachusetts 2 ..................................................................................................
6.6
7.6
7.4
Boston .........................................................................................................
6.3
6.8
6.4
Brockton .....................................................................................................
8.4
9.3
9.2
Fall River 1 .................................................................................................
7.9
10.1
9.9
Lawrence-Haverhill' ...................................................................................
7.0
8.8
8.7
Lowell .........................................................................................................
6.8
6.8
7.5
New Bedford ...............................................................................................
8.8
11.3
11.1
Spring-Chicopee-Holyoke ..............................................................................
6.3
7.4
7.2
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85MO1133R000100140002-2
September 1981
August 1982
Se tember 1982
(Preliminary)
Worcester ....................................................................................................
6.3
9.1
8.3
Michigan 2 ..........................................................................................................
10.7
14.5
14.5
Ann Arbor ...................................................................................................
7.7
11.4
10.6
Battle Creek ................................................................................................
9.2
15.5
16.1
Bay City ......................................................................................................
10.9
13.5
14.1
Detroit .........................................................................................................
11.7
15.2
15.2
Flint ............................................................................................................
13.9
17.5
17.8
Grand Rapids ..............................................................................................
8.0
10.7
11.0
Jackson .......................................................................................................
9.4
15.5
15.6
Kalamazoo-Portage ......................................................................................
7.6
10.2
10.8
Lansing-East Lansing ..................................................................................
9.0
13.5
11.9
Muskegon-Norton Shores-Muskegon Heights ...............................................
11.4
17.4
17.2
Saginaw ......................................................................................................
11.8
14.8
14.1
Minnesota .............................................................................................................
4.4
7.3
7.2
Duluth-Superior ' ........................................................................................
5.9
19.5
18.6
Minneapolis-St. Paul ....................................................................................
4.1
6.4
6.5
Rochester ....................................................................................................
3.6
5.1
5.2
St. Cloud .....................................................................................................
5.4
8.6
8.0
Mississippi ............................................................................................................
7.8
12.6
12.2
Jackson .......................................................................................................
5.8
8.7
8.5
Missouri ...............................................................................................................
1.0
9.0
8.8
Kansas City ' ..............................................................................................
6.8
8.4
8.5
St. Joseph ...................................................................................................
8.2
10.2
10.8
St. Louis' ..................................................................................................
7.9
9.6
9.7
Springfield ...................................................................................................
5.4
6.9
7.4
Montana ................................................................................................................
5.8
7.7
7.4
Billings ........................................................................................................
3.9
6.2
5.9
Great Falls ..................................................................................................
6.5
7.9
7.7
Nebraska ..............................................................................................................
3.6
5.5
5.6
Lincoln ........................................................................................................
3.5
5.0
4.9
Omaha ' .....................................................................................................
5.1
6.6
7.2
Nevada .................................................................................................................
6.2
10.2
10.4
Las Vegas ...................................................................................................
7.3
11.5
11.6
Reno ...........................................................................................................
4.5
8.0
8.1
New Hampshire ....................................................................................................
4.5
6.5
6.3
Manchester .................................................................................................
5.1
6.8
6.4
Nashua ........................................................................................................
4.6
6.6
6.3
New Jersey 2 .......................................................................................................
6.3
8.1
8.6
Atlantic City ................................................................................................
6.4
8.2
8.9
Jersey City ..................................................................................................
9.6
12.8
13.0
Long Branch-Asbury Park ...........................................................................
6.1
7.9
8.2
New Brunswick-Perth Amboy-Sayreville ......................................................
5.7
8.7
8.5
Newark .......................................................................................................
6.3
8.8
8.4
Paterson-Clifton-Passaic ..............................................................................
8.1
11.5
10.7
Trenton .......................................................................................................
5.0
8.3
8.2
Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton ..........................................................................
9.6
15.0
15.1
New Mexico .........................................................................................................
6.8
10.0
9.9
Albuquerque ................................................................................................
7.3
8.6
8.4
Las Cruces ..................................................................................................
7.0
11.1
10.0
New York 2 ..........................................................................................................
7.0
8.4
8.4
Albany-Schenectady-Troy .............................................................................
5.2
6.1
7.0
Binghamton ' .............................................................................................
5.7
6.9
1.7
Buffalo ........................................................................................................
8.8
11.9
12.5
Elmira .........................................................................................................
6.2
10.4
12.3
Nassau-Suffolk ............................................................................................
5.7
5.9
6.9
New York ....................................................................................................
7.8
9.7
8.6
New York City 2 .........................................................................................
8.5
10.1
9.2
Poughkeepsie ..............................................................................................
5.6
5.2
6.0
Rochester ....................................................................................................
5.3
6.3
7.5
Syracuse .....................................................................................................
6.1
7.1
8.0
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
UNEMPLOYMENT RATES BY STATE AND SELECTED METROPOLITAN AREAS-Continued
September 1981
August 1982
September 1982
(Preliminary)
Utica-Rome .................................................................................................
6.2
7.8
8.4
North Carolina ......................................................................................................
6.0
9.0
8.7
Asheville ......................................................................................................
5.8
7.5
7.5
Charlotte-Gastonia .......................................................................................
5.3
7.4
7.0
Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point .........................................................
6.1
8.3
8.0
Raleigh-Durham ...........................................................................................
3.5
4.5
4.7
North Dakota .......................................................................................................
3.8
4.7
4.8
Fargo-Moorhead ' .......................................................................................
4.4
4.9
4.6
Ohio 2 ..................................................................................................................
10.0
12.5
12.3
Akron ..........................................................................................................
9.7
12.1
11.8
Canton ........................................................................................................
'
10.6
14.5
13.6
Cincinnati
.................................................................................................
9.4
(3)
(3)
Cleveland ....................................................................................................
9.0
11.0
10.6
Columbus ....................................................................................................
8.8
9.2
8.8
Dayton ........................................................................................................
8.8
11.4
10.9
Toledo ' ......................................................................................................
11.2
12.2
12.3
Youngstown-Warren ....................................................................................
11.2
21.0
18.7
Oklahoma .............................................................................................................
3.4
5.7
5.8
Enid ............................................................................................................
2.0
5.3
6.2
Lawton ........................................................................................................
4.1
5.0
5.0
Oklahoma City .............................................................................................
3.5
4.5
5.0
Tulsa ...........................................................................................................
3.4
6.4
6.6
Oregon .................................................................................................................
8.9
10.3
10.0
Eugene-Springfield .......................................................................................
10.9
11.0
10.9
Portland ' ...................................................................................................
7.7
9.7
9.9
Salem ..........................................................................................................
7.4
8.1
7.6
Pennsylvania 2 .....................................................................................................
8.2
10.3
10.9
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton ' ....................................................................
7.4
11.1
10.6
Altoona ........................................................................................................
12.4
13.8
10.8
Erie .............................................................................................................
9.4
11.1
12.4
Harrisburg ...................................................................................................
5.9
5.5
6.2
Johnstown ...................................................................................................
12.1
14.7
16.7
Lancaster ....................................................................................................
4.9
6.5
6.6
Northeast Pennsylvania ...............................................................................
9.1
9.3
10.7
Philadelphia ' ....................................................................................
7.9
8.1
8.4
Pittsburgh ...................................................................................................
7.3
12.5
14.0
Reading .......................................................................................................
7.2
8.5
9.0
Williamsport ................................................................................................
11.7
10.6
11.7
York ............................................................................................................
7.3
11.4
10.8
Rhode Island ........................................................................................................
6.8
9.5
8.6
Providence-Warwick-Pawtucket' ................................................................
6.9
10.0
9.0
South Carolina ......................................................................................................
8.2
11.3
10.7
Charleston-North Charleston ........................................................................
7.9
8.8
9.0
Columbia .....................................................................................................
6.1
8.1
7.2
Greenville-Spartanburg .................................................................................
7.0
11.1
10.2
South Dakota .......................................................................................................
4.2
4.3
4.6
Sioux Falls ..................................................................................................
4.8
3.7
4.2
Tennessee .............................................................................................................
8.3
11.1
11.4
Chattanooga' ....................
......................................................................
7.7
11.0
11.5
Knoxville ......................................................................................................
6.8
7.6
8.2
Memphis' ...................................................................................................
8.4
9.5
9.6
Nashville-Davidson .......................................................................................
6.2
8.4
8.1
Texas 2 .................................................................................................................
5.4
7.0
8.0
Dallas-Fort Worth ........................................................................................
4.9
6.0
6.4
Houston .......................................................................................................
4.8
7.0
8.2
San Antonio ................................................................................................
6.7
7.2
7.9
Utah .....................................................................................................................
6.1
7.5
7.7
Salt Lake City-Ogden ...................................................................................
6.2
7.3
7.6
Vermont ...............................................................................................................
4.7
6.3
5.7
Virginia .................................................................................................................
5.6
7.2
7.4
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
UNEMPLOYMENT RATES BY STATE AND SELECTED METROPOLITAN AREAS-Continued
September 1981
August 1982
September 1982
(Preliminary)
Lynchburg ...................................................................................................
4.9
8.6
9.3
Newport News-Hampton ..............................................................................
6.0
6.1
6.7
Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Portsmouth' ...........................................................
6.2
7.1
7.4
Petersburg-Colonial Heights-Hopewell ..........................................................
7.9
8.6
8.9
Richmond ....................................................................................................
4.3
5.7
5.7
Roanoke ......................................................................................................
5.7
7.0
6.7
Washington ..........................................................................................................
8.8
11.9
10.9
Seattle-Everett .............................................................................................
7.8
10.7
10.0
Spokane ......................................................................................................
9.3
12.2
12.0
Tacoma .......................................................................................................
9.4
12.2
12.0
West Virginia .......................................................................................................
8.4
13.6
14.0
Charleston ...................................................................................................
7.3
9.7
9.7
Huntington-Ashland' ..................................................................................
9.4
14.1
(1)
Parkersburg-Marietta' ................................................................................
8.4
12.4
12.6
Wheeling' ..................................................................................................
8.0
13.6
13.8
Wisconsin .............................................................................................................
6.3
10.4
10.2
Appleton-Oshkosh ........................................................................................
5.8
9.7
9.8
Eau Claire ...................................................................................................
6.0
10.2
8.8
Green Bay ...................................................................................................
6.8
9.2
8.9
Janesville-Beloit ...........................................................................................
6.6
19.4
13.2
Kenosha ......................................................................................................
7.0
8.9
10.7
La Crosse ....................................................................................................
6.0
8.4
7.9
Madison ......................................................................................................
4.5
6.6
6.0
Milwaukee ...................................................................................................,
6.8
11.0
11.5
Racine .........................................................................................................
7.5
14.8
13.9
Wyoming ..............................................................................................................
3.3
5.7
5.5
'Includes interstate portion of area located in adjacent State.
'Data are obtained directly from the Current Population Survey.
3Data not available.
Note.-Data refer to place of residence. Estimates for 1981 have been benchmarked to 1981 Current Population Survey annual averages. Except
in the 10 States and 2 areas designated by footnote 2, estimates for 1982 are provisional and will be revised when new benchmarked information
becomes available.
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Local Area Unemployment Statistics Program, and cooperating State employment
security agencies.
RESTORATION OF FINANCIAL HEALTH TO INDUSTRY, BUSINESS AND
AGRICULTURE
The Committee recognizes the necessity for restoring and devel-
oping our physical resources and the necessity for federal assist-
ance in these extremely difficult economic times. The Committee
also recognizes that steps be taken to insure that our foreign and
domestic policies should be modified in such a manner so that we
restore private industry to a position where it will compete with
foreign production both at home and abroad. Too often we have fo-
cused on the terms on which we will sell, instead of meeting the
terms on which foreign buyers will buy. Too often we have made
competitors out of our customers.
The Committee believes we must correct this situation and the
devastating impact which it is having on our domestic industry,
both large and small; steel, automotive, and agricultural. In light
of this situation, the Committee is recommending funding to the
Secretary of Treasury and the Secretary of Commerce to work in
cooperation with representatives of American industrial, agricul-
tural, and labor communities to review the existing situation and
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
submit to the Congress the relevant information necessary for de-
veloping a proposal which would restore our competitive position.
Special attention should be given to developing similar trade ad-
vantages currently being offered by foreign governments or
through government-owned corporations. This proposal should
point up all of the restrictive barriers to free trade and recommend
specific actions to enable American enterprise to compete in world
markets and restore a healthly balance of payments.
Because of the serious nature of this situation, the Committee re-
quests that the information and proposals be submitted to the ap-
propriate committees of Congress for appropriate legislation in a
preliminary manner by February 1, 1983 and that the final report
be submitted by May 1, 1983.
COOPERATION WITH THE PRIVATE SECTOR
In the past the Federal government has come to the assistance of
the private sector when help was needed to avoid bankruptcies and
foreclosures, and to maintain productive capacity and employment
levels. Recent assistance to the Chrysler Corporation, the Lockheed
Aircraft Corporation and the City of New York are examples of
necessary and wise federal investments in both the short-term and
the future.
Each day we have presented to us examples of the serious plight
of private industry, demonstrated by the growing debts of private
citizens and our corporations, which under present conditions could
force foreclosures, bankruptcies, and other types of liquidation. We
cannot permit the financial distress of individual enterprises to
spread throughout the private sector causing severe dislocation to
the economy at large. We must realize that there is a difference
between money and wealth. We have a country rich in resources
and human talent. We also have a temporary problem with our
money. We must remember not to confuse these two separate facts.
We must protect our resources for future generations by getting
ourselves out of the financial slump we are currently in. This has
been done in the past through innovative partnerships between the
federal government and the private sector-and it can be done
again today.
PRECEDENT FOR CONGRESSIONAL ACTION
Twice before in our history the Congress has created a tempo-
rary Federal corporation to restore economic stability to the coun-
try. In 1918 the Congress created the War Finance Corporation to
strengthen the private investment markets and to make loans to
industries engaged in wartime production. During the depression of
1920 to 1922, Congress transformed the War Finance Corporation
into an Emergency Finance Corporation. As the economy of the
country improved throughout the 1920's and prosperity returned,
the War Finance Corporation was phased out.
As the country moved out of the 1920's and into the Great De-
pression of the 1930's, many leaders of the country pushed for the
reestablishment of the War Finance Corporation.
To meet the need to restore economic stability to the country,
the 72d Congress passed H.R. 7360 creating the Reconstruction Fi-
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
nance Corporation. The act was signed into law by President
Hoover on January 22, 1932, as Public Law No. 2.
The Corporation's major functions at first were the extension of
credit to agriculture, commerce, and industry through loans to
banks and other financial institutions, insurance companies, agri-
cultural credit agencies, and railroads. The lending authority of the
Corporation was subsequently broadened to include authority to
purchase the capital stock of banks, insurance companies, agricul-
tural credit corporation and national mortgage associations. Au-
thority was also given the Corporation to make loans to business
enterprises, mining interests, disaster victims, and public school
authorities, and to assist in financing the construction of public
works. It also was authorized and directed to allocate funds to, to
make loans and advances to, and to purchase the securities of var-
ious U.S. Government corporations and agencies.
In the postwar period as the economy returned to normal, pro-
grams of the RFC were one-by-one spun off to other Government
agencies and the Corporation was finally abolished by Reorganiza-
tion Plan No. 1 of 1957.
During its 25-year history, the RFC was among the largest and
most complex of all Federal lending agencies. It possessed unlimit-
ed authority to borrow funds from the U.S. Treasury, disbursing
over $40 billion and guaranteeing private loans and investments
for many more billions. Although the RFC did not have the pur-
pose of making a profit, accounting records show that for its activi-
ties taken as a whole, its revenues and interest income exceeded its
losses and expenses, even though many individual programs were
undertaken with little hope of recovery of the funds.
Although this emergency jobs bill does not provide any legisla-
tive language creating a federal corporation similar to the RFC,
the Committee believes that the appropriate legislative committees
of the House should examine the current need for private sector/
government cooperation and report legislation to the House floor
as soon as possible at the beginning. of the 98th Congress.
RESPONSIVE MONETARY POLICY
On April 26, 1982, the Chairman of the Committee asked the
General Accounting Office to conduct a study ". . . of the nation's
monetary and fiscal policy with suggestions for change. Special at-
tention should be placed on the effect of the restrictive monetary
policy of the Federal Reserve System on present and future eco-
nomic growth."
In its report, which was published on August 31, 1982 (GAO/
PAD 82-45), the GAO stated in part that the dominant view sup-
ports an approach to economic policy built around a long run objec-
tive of moderating inflation, and that monetary and fiscal policy
should be based on a consistent set of long-run employment, price
level, and economic growth goals for the economy that are both de-
sirable and achievable.
The current restrictive policy of the Federal Reserve System
must be moderated in order to augment and amplify federal fiscal
policy, to reverse the disastrous effects of unemployment, and to
turn the corner and begin a strong economic recovery.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Because of the continued restrictive monetary policy of the Fed-
eral Reserve System, this Joint Resolution directs the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System to ". . . take such actions
as are necessary to achieve and maintain a level of interest rates
low enough to generate significant economic growth and thereby
reduce the current intolerable level of unemployment."
BENEFITS TO THE NATION
While any unemployment program has the immediate benefit of
putting people back to work, the specific set of measures proposed
in this joint resolution has the added benefit of creating productive
jobs that contribute to the long term strength of our nation. Some
of the benefits to be derived from this dual approach include:
MAINTAINING AND PROTECTING PUBLIC INVESTMENT
Funds are provided to accelerate repairs and improvements at
various Federal buildings throughout the nation and provide thou-
sands of productive jobs. This program is designed to correct prob-
lems of deterioration and obsolescence in existing structures, and
provide improvements to space utilization, fire prevention, special
aids for the handicapped and the expanded use of energy conserva-
tion measures.
REBUILDING AMERICA'S HIGHWAYS AND TRANSIT SYSTEMS
Appropriations are being provided to the Department of Trans-
portation to allow for the funding of non-interstate highway and
local transit projects where a State has decided to withdraw part of
its allocation of interstate mileage in order to substitute other proj-
ects. It is estimated that the availability of these funds will create
some 7,500 jobs in the transportation industry.
IMPROVING THE SAFETY OF RAIL PASSENGERS
Funds are being provided to increase safety and eliminate dan-
gerous overhead railroad bridge crossings in the Northeast corri-
dor. This appropriation would provide for the rehabilitation of ap-
proximately 200 bridges.
REBUILDING RAILROAD INFRASTRUCTURE
Funds are being provided to Amtrak for 40 separate projects to
maintain and rehabilitate existing tracks and track-related facili-
ties in the Northeast Corridor. It is -estimated that this appropri-
ation would create over 2,000 jobs.
IMPROVING FACILITIES AND SERVICES PROVIDED TO VETERANS
Construction funds are being provided to maintain and repair
projects at 172 existing VA hospitals throughout the country. Most
of these projects can begin within six months.
PUBLIC HOUSING MODERNIZATION
Additional funds are being provided for modernization of public
housing, above and beyond the appropriation included for this pur-
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
pose in Title I of this resolution. A significant share of these funds
will support projects employing less-skilled workers in making es-
sential repairs to public housing units.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Additional funding is included for Community Development
Grants above that already provided in the regular 1983 HUD Ap-
propriation Act. Funds will be used in metropolitan areas for a
range of community improvements, with emphasis on "light" con-
struction work.
INCREASING LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Funds are provided to the Economic Development Administra-
tion for construction projects designed to stimulate local economic
development. Examples of activities that are eligible are: industrial
parks, water and sewer improvements, central business district im-
provements, public and private building weatherization, and reha-
bilitation of inner city housing for residential use.
INCREASING SMALL BUSINESS ACTIVITIES
A direct appropriation of $2 million is being provided to the
Small Business Administration for the purpose of increasing SBA
small business development company guarantees. This will result
in an increase in the loan guarantee program of $100 million.
Funds are used for the purpose of plant and land acquisition, con-
struction and the purchase of equipment.
DEVELOPING PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS
Funds are provided for grants to State and local governments for
small business oriented employment and natural resources develop-
ment for small businesses to provide tree planting and other im-
provements which would upgrade parks and recreational facilities.
IMPROVING AND CREATING PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
Funds are provided to the National Park Service to make grants
to urban areas to upgrade existing recreation facilities.
Funding is provided to the National Park Service for the im-
provement and maintenance of park service roads, trails and exist-
ing facilities.
PRESERVING THE NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM
Funding is provided to the Forest Service for health and safety
rehabilitation and for maintenance of roads, trails and existing
facilities.
IMPROVING INDIAN HEALTH FACILITIES
Funding is provided to the Indian Health Service for the con-
struction of sanitation facilities for Indian housing units.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Funding is provided to the Fish and Wildlife Service for the
maintenance and rehabilitation of refuges, hatcheries and research
facilities.
Funds are provided for the expansion of existing rural water and
waste disposal grants of the Farmers Home Administration as well
as for construction of new facilities. In addition, funds are included
for salaries and expenses of the Farmers Home Administration to
conduct the expanded program level mandated by this increase in
grant and loan activity.
Funds are being provided to the Soil Conservation Service to de-
velop overall work plans for resource conservation and develop-
ment in cooperation with local sponsors. This includes developing
local plans for conservation, assisting local groups in carrying out
these plans, and making loans to private sponsors for conservation
and development.
Funds are being provided to the Soil Conservation Service to co-
operate with the states and various local subdivisions to prevent
erosion, floodwater, and sediment damage in the watershed and to
further the conservation, development and utilization of water.
FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL PRISON MODERNIZATION
Funds are being provided to the Federal Prison System for the
modernization and repair of existing Federal penal facilities.
Funds are being provided to the Department of Justice for the
support of United States prisoners housed in state or local jails, for
the purpose of equipping, renovating and constructing of proper
facilities.
ENHANCEMENT OF WATER RESOURCE AND HYDROELECTRIC POWER
BENEFITS
Funds are provided to the Corps of Engineers for rehabilitation,
structural and road repairs at completed Corps of Engineers proj-
ects. These funds could also be used for needed dredging and levee
and channel improvement work. Recreational facilities at existing
projects are also eligible for funding under this activity.
Funds are provided to the Bureau of Reclamation for work to be
done on water distribution facilities, archeological studies, recre-
ational facilities, riprap protection, erosion control, correcting seep-
age at spillways and other related work.
Funds are being provided for the creation of an emergency jobs
creation public works employment program for the long-term un-
employed. This program is designed to create a labor-intensive pro-
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
26
gram of productive jobs that result in tangible benefits to the com-
munity through the repair, maintenance, and rehabilitation of
public facilities.
Funds are being provided for the initiation of a program author-
ized by Title III of the new Jobs Training Partnership Act (Public
Law 97-300). This would be a comprehensive program of training
and employment services for displaced workers, such as the unem-
ployed auto and steel workers.
Funds are being provided to bring the appropriation for Job
Corps to the fully authorized amount for FY 1983. This appropri-
ation would create approximately 2,300 more slots to assist impov-
erished and unemployed youths aged 16-21. The program is de-
signed to provide a range of educational and job training services
to make these youth employable in productive jobs in the private
economy.
INCREASING ASSISTANCE TO THE UNEMPLOYED THROUGH EMPLOYMENT
SERVICES
Funds are being provided to hire additional staff in the State em-
ployment security agencies. This will expedite job search activities
for unemployed people and will ensure more timely and accurate
processing of unemployment claim checks.
Funds are provided for day care services for an additional 33,000
children, designed to meet some of the critical effects of the cur-
rent high unemployment on families with small children.
Funds are being provided for the community and migrant health
program to increase the availability of home health care for disad-
vantaged families. In addition to creating 1,250 jobs, this program
is expected to lower total health care costs by reducing the number
of days of hospital care which would have to be reimbursed by
Medicare, Medicaid or private insurance.
Funds are being provided to private voluntary organizations for
food distribution and emergency shelter for needy individuals.
These funds will augment the resources of existing private organi-
zations, which are being strained to meet the growing needs for
such assistance.
CONSTRUCTION AND MODERNIZATION OF HOUSING UNITS FOR MILITARY
FAMILIES
Funds are being provided to the Department of Defense for main-
tenance, modernization and construction of family housing at var-
ious military bases throughout the United States. The $490 million
recommended will stimulate 18,500 jobs in the construction indus-
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
try. The appropriation is split as follows: new constuction starts
($59.2 million); modernization of existing housing ($113.3 million);
and real property maintenance ($317 million).
Funding is provided at the level of $250 million for the low-
income weatherization program which is estimated to provide
weatherization to some 250,000 homes.
SCHEDULED MOTOR VEHICLE PROCUREMENT
Funds are provided to the GSA to purchase approximately 15,000
motor vehicles to update and replace older and fuel-inefficient vehi-
cles in the federal fleet. Purchase of these vehicles would stimulate
jobs in the ailing automotive and related industries. The appropri-
ation is limited to the purchase of domestically produced vehicles.
CAUTION ABOUT PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT
In recommending appropriations for public service employment,
the Committee makes this carefully considered recommendation
only because of the severity of the current, and foreseeable, unem-
ployment problem. This joint resolution is designed to have an im-
mediate impact on joblessness, and at the same time provides pro-
ductive, tangible and long lasting results for the wealth of the
country. The Committee firmly believes that economic stability
must be promoted through the private sector and stresses that the
provision of such public service jobs should be viewed only as a
temporary action taken in response to the current economic emer-
gency. The Committee is aware of the contribution that public serv-
ice jobs can make to some local agencies of government, but em-
phasizes its belief that such jobs must eventually be fully funded
by state and local government if they are desired on a longer term
or permanent basis.
ENERGY SAVING IMPROVEMENTS IN BUILDING REHABILITATION
Funds have been provided for a number of agencies in this joint
resolution for the rehabilitation of buildings. The Committee ex-
pects those agencies to continue to give a priority consideration to
energy saving improvements in all such rehabilitation work.
NEED FOR PROMPT ACTION BY THE ADMINISTRATION
The Committee on Appropriations fully intends that the provi-
sions in this bill be promptly carried out by the Executive Branch.
The severity of the economic situation demands prompt action.
Any ceilings which have been established in the Executive Branch
by administrative action for employment and outlays should be in-
creased to the extent necessary to fulfill the provisions of this bill.
The Committee wishes to state that it will look unfavorably upon
any rescission requests for amounts funded in this emergency jobs
title.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85MO1133ROO0100140002-2
Agriculture Subcommittee:
Rural Water and Waste Disposal Grants:
Appropriaton .................................................................................. $200,000,000
Loan Limitation increase ............................................................. (600,000,000)
Salaries and expenses ................................................................... 6,500,000
Resource Conservation and Development ........................................ 15,000,000
Watershed and Flood Prevention Operation:
Appropriation ................................................................................. 100,000,000
Loan Limitation increase ............................................................. (25,000,000)
Food Distribution and Emergency Shelter: CCC (also see
FEMA) ................................................................................................. (language)
Comerce-Justice-State-Judiciary Subcommittee:
Economic Development Administration ........................................... 200,000,000
SBA National Resources Development Grants ............................... 50,000,000
SBA Small Business Guarantee Program:
Appropriation ................................................................................. 2,000,000
Guarantee program increase ....................................................... (100,000,000)
Business loan and investment fund ........................................... 230,000,000
Federal Prison System ......................................................................... 55,000,000
Jail Renovation and Construction System ....................................... 40,000,000
Competition in World Markets (Study) ............................................. 200,000
Energy & Water Development Subcommittee:
Corps of Engineers-Construction ..................................................... 145,723,000
Bureau of Reclamation-Construction ............................................. 31,600,000
HUD-Independent Agencies Subcommittee:
VA hospital repair and maintenance ................................................ 50,000,000
Public Housing Modernization ........................................................... 200,000,000
Community development block grants ............................................. 1,000,000,000
Food Distribution and Emergency Shelter:
FEMA (also see CCC) .................................................................... 50,000,000
Interior Subcommittee:
Urban parks and recreation ............................................................... 100,000,000
National Park Service .......................................................................... 50,000,000
Forest Service ........................................................................................ 45,000,000
Indian Health Service .......................................................................... 50,000,000
Fish and Wildlife Service .................................................................... 25,000,000
Low Income Energy Weatherization ................................................. 250,000,000
Labor-HHS-Education Subcommittee:
Emergency Jobs Creation .................................................................... 1,000,000,000
Employment and Training Assistance:
Dislocated workers ........................................................................ 200,000,000
Job Corps ......................................................................................... 32,400,000
Employment Services:
Job Search assistance (trust fund) ............................................. (75,000,000)
Unemployment claims staff (trust fund) ................................... (264,000,000)
Day Care Services ................................................................................. 50,000,000
Home health services ........................................................................... 15,000,000
Military Construction Subcommittee:
Family Housing ..................................................................................... 489,485,000
Transportation Subcommittee:
Interstate Transfer Grants:
Highways ........................................................................................ 200,000,000
Transit ............................................................................................. 50,000,000
Northeast Corridor Overhead Highway Bridges ............................. 100,000,000
AMTRAK Maintenance of Way ......................................................... 90,000,000
Treasury-Postal Service Subcommittee:
Federal Buildings Fund ....................................................................... 200,000,000
GSA-Purchase of Motor Vehicles .................................................... 100,000,000
Appropriation ..................................................................................... 5,422,908,000
Trust Funds ........................................................................................ (339,000,000)
Loan Limitation Increase ................................................................ (725,000,000)
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85MO1133ROO0100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
29
MAINTAINING AND PROTECTING PUBLIC INVESTMENT
FEDERAL BUILDINGS
This appropriation would provide $200,000,000 for the repair and
alteration of public buildings. The Repair and Alterations activity
provides funding for basic work to correct deterioration, malfunc-
tion and obsolescence, improvement to space to promote utilization,
special fire prevention, lifesafety and property protection, special
aids for the handicapped, special environmental protection, and the
special energy conservation program.
The $200 million appropriated will be spent in the following re-
gions on repair and alteration projects:
Region 1: Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Rhode Island.
Region 2: New York, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands.
Region 3: Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, Delaware.
Region 4: Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississip-
pi, Florida, Kentucky.
Region 5: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois.
Region 6: Nebraska, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas.
Region 7: New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana.
Region 8: Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado.
Region 9: California, Nevada, Arizona, Hawaii, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands.
Region 10: Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Alaska.
National Capital Region: Washington, D.C.
REBUILDING AMERICA'S HIGHWAYS
The Committee recommends an additional $200,000,000 for high-
way projects substituted for Interstate Highway segments. The
Committee believes that this increased funding is required to make
a meaningful reduction in the large balance of unfunded authority
under this program. As of September 30, 1982, the balance for sub-
stitute highway and transit projects was approximately $4.5 billion.
Information provided by the Federal Highway Administration in-
dicates that an additional $4.5 billion (State plus Federal) in Inter-
state System withdrawals is anticipated before the September 30,
1983, deadline. Testimony also indicates that Interstate transfer
project requirements substantially exceed available funding for this
program. The Committee believes the Federal Government has a
"good faith" commitment to fund substitute Interstate projects
within a reasonable timeframe and is recommending additional
funds in an attempt to fulfill that commitment. It is estimated that
an additional $200,000,000 for substitute highway projects will pro-
vide employment for approximately 7,000 individuals.
IMPROVING MASS TRANSPORTATION
The resolution includes an appropriation of $50,000,000 for tran-
sit projects which have been substituted for Interstate highway seg-
ments.
IMPROVING THE SAFETY OF RAIL PASSENGERS
The safety of railroad and highway travelers in the Northeast
Corridor area has been jeopardized by a longstanding dispute be-
tween Amtrak and the states concerning who has responsibility for
repairing highway bridges over Amtrak tracks. This provision
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
would appropriate $100,000,000 to the Secretary for the rehabilita-
tion of approximately 200 bridges crossing Northeast Corridor rail
properties which constitute a danger to motorists, pedestrians or
rail operations. These funds are expected to generate approximate-
ly 3,000 to 5,000 jobs.
REBUILDING RAILROAD INFRASTRUCTURE
An additional $90,000,000 would be provided for 40 separate proj-
ects to maintain and rehabilitate Amtrak tracks and track-related
facilities in the Northeast Corridor between Boston and Washing-
ton. This would reduce significantly the backlog of Amtrak mainte-
nance work which has been building up because of Federal budget
constraints. Deferred maintenance has been a widespread problem
in the rail industry which results in a downward spiral that can
only be corrected by massive infusions of capital dollars in the
future. These funds are expected to generate approximately 1,275
to 2,500 jobs.
IMPROVING FACILITIES AND SERVICES PROVIDED TO VETERANS
The Committee recommends an additional $50,000,000 for the
Veterans Administration's nonrecurring maintenance and repair
program in fiscal year 1983. These funds will create approximately
2,000 jobs in VA facilities, including 172 hospitals, 16 domicilities,
and 102 nursing homes.
Nonrecurring maintenance and repair projects are essential to
protect the government's investment in more than 5,000 separate
VA buildings having nearly 115,700,000 square feet of floor space
and for which the current replacement value is in excess of
$20,000,000,000. Examples of such project categories include electri-
cal, fire and safety, Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospi-
tals' deficiencies, exterior and interior maintenance, conservation
of energy, and air conditioning and refrigeration systems. These
projects cover necessary maintenance of real property and grounds
maintenance outside the building perimeter, including roads and
sidewalks.
The Veterans Administration is directed to expeditiously allocate
the $50,000,000 to its medical facilities. The facility administrators
are directed to give priority to projects that are labor intensive and
do not require lengthy planning. The Committee's directions are to
ensure that the maintenance and repair projects are underway
within six months of enactment of this legislation.
PUBLIC HOUSING MODERNIZATION
The Committee is recommending an additional $200,000,000 for
the low-rent public housing modernization program in fiscal year
1983. Taken together with the $2,500,000,000 provided in Title I of
this resolution-these funds will help ensure that the projects now
identified for the most immediate requirements can proceed to con-
struction as soon as possible. The Committee is aware that the
public housing modernization program is highly labor intensive. It
is estimated that approximately 75 percent of modernization costs
are for wages. Most of these are for construction wages-but a pro-
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
portion would be for less-skilled workers. The Committee urges
that this $200,000,000 be targeted particularly at those kinds of
projects which lend themselves to creating jobs for less-skilled
workers where unemployment rates are among the highest.
Again, as in the case of the $2,500,000,000 provided in Title I, it
is expected that these expenditures will prevent further deteriora-
tion of the public housing stock and reduce the need for increased
levels of funding in the future when rehabilitation needs would
become more severe. It is anticipated that the total of
$2,700,000,000 for public housing modernization carried in Title I
and Title II of this joint resolution will create approximately 90,000
direct and indirect jobs.
The Committee notes that the total of $2,700,000,000 provided for
this activity in this joint resolution does not begin to meet the
entire modernization needs of public housing. It is estimated that
the need for modernization probably exceeds $10,000,000,000.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
The Committee has included $1,000,000,000 in this joint resolu-
tion for community development grants in fiscal year 1983 to
create approximately 65,000 jobs in the light construction industry.
These funds are to be allocated for "brick and mortar" public facili-
ty-type programs where the projects can move to construction in
less than six months.
To create jobs and stimulate construction, the projects should be
started as soon as possible. To ensure that jobs are created quickly,
the Department is directed to distribute the funds within 30 days
of enactment of this joint resolution. In using the funds, local gov-
ernments are encouraged to give priority to repair and mainte-
nance of existing facilities or other "light" construction work.
Language has been included in the joint resolution directing that
these funds be used only in metropolitan cities and urban counties.
The Committee has taken this action because it believes these
funds should be expended as soon as possible. The Committee un-
derstands that the smaller localities currently have unobligated
balances of approximately $300,000,000 under the community de-
velopment grants program.
The funds recommended herein shall be allocated for the follow-
ing activities:
(1) Public Works and Public Facilities
(2) Highway and Street Construction/Repair
(3) Demolition and Site Improvement
(4) Parks and Open Space, Historic Preservation
(5) Redevelopment Improvement
INCREASING LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
For the Public Works Grants program of the Economic Develop-
ment Administration, the resolution provides an additional
$200,000,000 above the level provided by H.R. 6957, the FY 1983
Appropriation Bill. It is estimated that this additional funding
would create 33,300 new jobs (primarily for construction and reha-
bilitation projects), stimulate local economic development, and con-
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
i
32
tribute to the Nation's recovery from the currently depressed level
of business activity.
Projects funded would include, but not be limited to, the follow-
ing economic development assistance activities:
-industrial park development;
-water and sewer development and improvement projects;
-central business district improvements;
-public and private building improvement projects;
-street and railway improvement;
-railway passenger terminal and station rehabilitation;
-marina and dock improvements and construction;
-hydroelectric dam construction; and
-rehabilitation of inner city housing for residential use.
The language in the resolution references authorizing legislation
not cited in the FY 1983 annual appropriation bill (H.R. 6957). This
reference continues program operations as in FY 1982 including a
moratorium on the de-designation of Redevelopment Areas. This
provision insures that all eligible EDA program recipients for the
FY 1982 EDA programs remain eligible for the FY 1983 EDA pro-
grams.
DIRECT LOANS
The Committee recommends an additional $230,000,000 above the
level provided in the FY 1983 Appropriation Bill (H.R. 6957) for the
direct business loan program authorized by section 7(a) of the
Small Business Act, as amended. This amount includes $25,000,000
for loans to disabled and Vietnam era veterans. This program pro-
vides loans to qualified small business concerns for a variety of
business development purposes-plant expansion, purchase of
equipment and additional inventories, and expansion of working
capital. Thus, such loans can create additional job opportunities,
not only in the small business concerns that obtain such assistance,
but also in broad sectors of the national economy such as the con-
struction and equipment industries. The demand for the direct
business loan program has recently increased and as of December
1, SBA had committed all funds available for the program under
the first continuing resolution. With the decline in interest rates,
the demand for this business loan program should continue to in-
crease in FY 1983. Therefore, the Committee recommends that ad-
ditional funds be provided in the continuing resolution to meet this
demand.
The Committee is concerned that these additional funds be used
solely for loans to small businesses which clearly demonstrate the
potential to create jobs. Therefore, the Committee directs SBA to
establish regulations that would insure these funds would be avail-
able only to those applicants who could demonstrate that the cost
of each job created would not exceed $20,000.
SECTION 503, CERTIFIED DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PROGRAM
The Committee recommends an additional $2,000,000 for the sec-
tion 503 Certified Development Company guarantee program. This
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
amount will permit an increase of $100,000,000 in the level for this
program above the level provided for in the FY 1983 Appropriation
Bill (H.R. 6957). Under this program, SBA guarantees debentures
of the Certified Development Companies, which in turn use the
proceeds to assist small businesses by financing part of long-term
fixed asset projects, which include plant expansion, land acquisi-
tion, and purchase of equipment. Since the program was estab-
lished by Congress in mid-1980, it is estimated that 23,000 jobs have
been created or saved with practically no direct outlay of Federal
funds. Based on this record, the Committee believes that the addi-
tional funds recommended for the program will stimulate the
growth and expansion of small businesses and contribute to the
Nation's recovery from the present depressed level of business ac-
tivity.
The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for SBA for grants to
State and local governments for small business oriented employ-
ment and natural resources development programs. These grants
would be used to make contracts with small businesses to provide
tree planting and other improvements which would upgrade parks
and recreational facilities. The Committee intends that the State
and local governments which receive these grants shall make con-
tracts only with those small business concerns that are capable of
providing the maximum amount of employment as well as lasting
public benefits.
IMPROVING PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $100,000,000 for
the Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program. This program
was first authorized in 1979 and has served as a catalyst for the
revitalization of many urban neighborhoods. To date, more than
300 cities have received grants, including cities of every size, loca-
tion and character. The U.S. Conference of Mayors testifed before
the Committee this year in strong support of the Urban Park pro-
gram. The overwhelming message from a bi-partisan panel of
mayors was that the program has made a difference in their cities.
The appropriation is made available for matching grants to local
governments for the purpose of rebuilding, remodeling, expanding,
or developing existing outdoor or indoor recreation areas and facili-
ties. Funds may be used to improve park landscapes, buildings, and
support facilities.
The Urban Park program enhances recreational facilities for
inner city youth and the elderly for whom opportunities to visit the
National Parks are limited.
As a jobs producer, the program is of value since many of the
projects require significant amounts of labor. Additionally, the
shared investment by the Federal and local governments may lead
to increased private sector investment in neighborhoods where rec-
reational facilities have been upgraded.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
OPERATION OF THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM
The amount of $50,000,000 recommended will permit the service
to contract for cyclic and operational maintenance and for rehabili-
tation of structures, roads, trails, fences, and other facilities at
units of the National Park System. There are many projects which
have been deferred or that can be accelerated for which contracts
with private firms can be let within 60-90 days after funds are ap-
portioned. The greatest impact on unemployment will be made in
or near urban areas such as Yosemite NP, Gateway NRA, Golden
Gate NRA, Indiana Dunes NL, Golden Gate NRA, Rocky Mountain
NP, urban areas on the Natchez Trace Parkway, Everglades NP,
Gulf Islands NS, Boston Harbor NHP, Independence Hall NHP,
Delaware Water Gap NRA and the Jefferson National Expansion
Memorial NHS. The Committee would support the use of these
funds to transport and house urban and rural unemployed to parks
with vacant residential YCC or YACC facilities to do productive
work in areas such as Yellowstone NP, Olympic NP, Organ Pipes
NM, Great Bend NP, Great Smokey Mountains NP, Kings Moun-
tain NMP, Chickasaw NRA, Okla., Death Valley NM and Grand
Canyon NP. Work can also be done in parks established to preserve
unique features under the resource management program in areas
such as Haleakala NP, Hawaii Volcanoes NP, Herbert Hoover
NHS, Zion NP, Fort Necessity NHP, and Hopewell Village NHS.
Acadia NP, Maine.
Allegheny Portage RR NHS, Pa.
Amistead NRA, Tex.
Andersonville NHS, Ga.
Antietam, NB, Md.
Bandalier NM, New Mex.
Big Bend NP, Tex.
Boston NHP, Mass.
Blue Ridge Parkway, Va. and N.C.
Cape Hatteras NS, N.C.
Chickasaw NRA, Okla.
Colorado NM, Colo.
Crater Lake NP, Oreg.
Cumberland Gap NHP, Ky.
Death Valley NM, Calif.
Delaware Water Gap NRA, Pa.
Everglades NP, Fla.
Fort Necessity NB, Pa.
Gateway NRA, N.Y.
George Washington Memoral Pkwy., Va.
Gettysbury NMP, Pa.
Golden Gate NRA, Calif.
Grand Canyon NP, Ariz.
Grand Teton NP, Wyo.
Great Smoky Mountains NP, Tenn.
Gulf Islands NS, Fla.
Haleakala NP, Hawaii.
Hot Springs NP, Ark.
Hawaii Volcanoes NP, Hawaii.
Isle Royale NP, Mich.
Independence NHP, Pa.
Indiana Dunes NL, Ind.
Jefferson NEMNHS, Mo.
Joshua Tree NM, Calif.
Lake Mead NRA, Nev.
Lassen Volcanic NP, Calif.
Mammoth Cave NP, Ky.
Mesa Verde NP, Colo.
Mount Rainier NP, Wash.
Natchez Trace Parkway, Miss. & Ala.
Olympic NP, Wash.
Padre Islands NS, Texas.
Petrified Forest NP, Ariz.
Point Reyes NS, Calif.
Prince William Forest NP, Va.
Rocky Mountain NP, Colo.
Saguaro NM, Ariz.
Salem Maritime, NHS, Mass.
Sequoia NP, Calif.
Statue of Liberty NM, N.Y.
Theodore Roosevelt NP, N. Dak.
Vicksburg NMP, Miss.
Voyageurs NP, Minn.
Yellowstone NP, Wyo.
Yosemite NP, Calif.
Washington D.C., National Capital
Region.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
35
FOREST SERVICE
NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM
The Committee recommends $25,000,000 for maintenance of
forest roads, trails, and facilities. These funds will be used as fol-
lows, to generate an estimated total of over 1,200 jobs:
Employment
generated
Facilities maintenance ..........................................................................................................
$8,000,000
210
Road maintenance ................................................................................................................
13,000,000
750
Trail maintenance .................................................................................................................
4,000,000
250
The facilities maintenance funds will be used for repairs and
minor rehabilitation of Forest Service facilities used for fire, ad-
ministrative and other purposes, including offices, service and stor-
age buildings, fire lookouts, and associated water, sanitation and
electrical systems. The Forest Service has identified a facilities
maintenance backlog of approximately $121 million as of fiscal
year 1983.
The road and trail maintenance funds will help prevent project-
ed deterioration of forest roads and trails, and will help to avoid
projected increases in overall road expenditures in the long run.
The trail maintenance activities are also important in protecting
the associated soil and water resources from erosion. Increased
levels of road and trail maintenance will also contribute to in-
creased user safety, as well as protection of the resource.
The estimated regional breakdown of the recommended funds
are as follows:
REGION
[Dollars in millions]
Facilities .....................................................................
1.2
0.8
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.2
0.3
0.8 0.4
Roads .........................................................................
3.0
0.6
0.6
0.6
1.6
3.0
1.8
1.6 0.2
Trails ..........................................................................
0.4
0.5
0.3
0.4
0.8
0.8
0.2
0.4 0.2
CONSTRUCTION, FOREST SERVICE
The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for health and safety re-
habilitation projects in National Forest recreation areas. These rep-
resent the highest priority health and safety projects identified at
over 150 sites in 33 states and Puerto Rico, out of a total identified
backlog of such projects of $100,000,000. The projects will be carried
out almost entirely under contract, and will provide an estimated
800 jobs.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
The National Forests will provide an estimated 233 million recre-
ation visitor days in fiscal year 1983, more than any other public
land agency. However, many of the Forest recreation sites are old,
or have developed potentially unsanitary conditions. The projects
will provide for rehabilitation of water and waste systems at many
of the most heavily used recreation sites. In some cases, the up-
grading will permit the Forest Service to charge increased user
fees, thereby increasing the return to the Treasury.
The projects involved have all been identified as the highest pri-
ority in each of the Forest Service regions. The projects can be ini-
tiated as soon as funds are available, and for the most part should
be accomplished within the fiscal year.
The Committee recommends $50,000,000 for construction and/or
provision of domestic water supplies, waste disposal facilities and
other essential sanitation facilities for Indian homes, communities
and lands: The recommended funding level represents the top pri-
ority projects out of a total of $500,000,000 of identified unmet
needs for sanitation facilities on Indian reservations, and will pro-
vide essential water and sewer services to approximately 7,000
Indian homes in 27 states. It is estimated that this program will
provide close to 3,000 jobs, of which about 1,700 will be direct con-
struction labor, and almost 1,300 will be related to providing the
necessary materials. These jobs will be particularly important on
Indian reservations and nearby communities, where unemployment
is currently running as high in some areas as 60-80 percent.
The amount of $25,000,000 recommended will permit the Service
to contract for maintenance and rehabilitation of structures, roads,
trails, and other facilities at wildlife refuges, hatcheries, and re-
search stations of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. There are
many projects which have been deferred for which contracts with
private firms can be let within 60-90 days after funds are appor-
tioned.
Projects, illustrated in the table which follows, range from road
repairs at the Moosehorn NWR in Maine, fencing at the San Luis
NWR in California, and a water delivery system at Hanalei NWR
in Hawaii.
National wildlife refuges:
Nashua NFH, New Hampshire: Effluent treatment facilities.
Northern Prairie Lab: Rehab heating/cooling system, cyclical maintenance.
Patuxent Research Center: Repair electrical system cyclical maintenance.
Denver W/L Research Lab: Insulation and cyclical maintenance.
San Francisco Bay NWR: Fishing pier/visitor facilities.
Patuxent W/L Research Center, Md.: Merriam Lab rehabilitation.
Great Meadows NWR, Mass: Shop/maintenance facility.
Yukon Delta NWR, Alaska: Facility rehabilitation.
Izembek NWR, Alaska: Facility rehabilitation.
Harris Neck NWR, Georgia: Maintenance facility complex.
Lacreek NWR, S. Dak.: Shop/storage building.
Anahauc NWR, Texas: Equipment storage building.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Tishomingo NWR, Okla.: Road and building repair and rehabilitation.
Charles M. Russell NWR, MT: Administrative facility/bunkhouse.
Quilcene NFH, Wash.: Raceway rehabilitation.
San Luis NWR, Calif.: Security fence and alarm system.
Wertheim NWR, New York: Dike repair.
Kofa NWR, Ariz.: Water monitoring system.
Sequoyah NWR, Okla.: Causeway rehabilitation.
Arrowwood NWR, N. Dak.: Nesting Islands.
J. Clark Salyer NWR, ND: Waterfowl production area rehab.
Hanalei NWR, Hawaii: Water delivery system.
Medicine Lake NWR,, Mont.: WPA improvement.
Devils Lake WMD, N. Dak.: Equipment/habitat development.
J. Clark Salyer NWR, ND: Habitat improvement.
No. Attleboro NFH, Mass.: Boundary fencing.
Coleman NFR, Calif.: Raceway rehabilitation.
Malheur NWR, Oregon: Malheur Lake rehabilitation.
Madison WMD, S. Dak.: Habitat improvement.
Tewaukon NWR, S. Dak.: Habitat improvement.
Des Lacs NWR, N. Dak.: Habitat improvement.
Norfolk NFH, Ark.: Water supply and drain system.
Hagerman Res. Station, ID: Building rehabilitation.
Fish Springs NWR, Tex.: Dike rehabilitation.
Blackwater NWR, Md.: Habitat restoration/improvement.
Shiawassee NWR, Mich.: Moist soil units 3 and 4.
Columbia White-tailed Deer NWR, Wash.: Center road/dock rehabilitation.
Lahontan NFH, Nev.: Standby generator, water system.
Brazoria NWR, Texas: Entrance road rehabilitation.
Parker River NWR, Mass.: Entrance area upgrade.
Aransas NWR, Texas: Loop road rehabilitation.
Chincoteague NWR, Va.: Road rehabilitation.
Cape Romain NWR, S.C.: Headquarters completion.
White Sulphur Springs, NFH, W. Va.: Road rehabilitation.
Craig Brook NFH, Me.: Road rehabilitation.
Browns Park NWR, Colo.: Road improvement.
Mackay Island NWR, Va.: Hog point road rehabilitation.
Bitter Lake NWR, NM: Entrance road rehabilitation.
Pungo NWR, N. Car.: Canal rehabilitation.
Blackwater NWR, Md.: Delmarva fox squirrel habitat improvement.
J. Clark Salyer NWR, Md.: Marsh rehabilitation.
Quivira NWR, Kansas: WCS rehabilitation.
Charles M. Russell NWR, Mont.: Water facilities rehabilitation.
Great Swamp NWR, NJ: Dike rip-rap.
Alamosa NWR, Colorado: Fencing.
J. Clark Salyer NWR, ND: Pool 356 rehabilitation.
Blackwater NWR, Md.: Shoreline and dike protection.
Kern NWR, Calif.: WCS replacement.
Brazoria NWR, Texas: Road rehabilitation.
Hagerman NWR, Texas: Spillway rehabilitation.
Reelfoot NWR, Tenn.: Administration/maintenance/storage facilities relocation
(completion).
Ft. Niobrara/Valence NWR, Nev.: Residence rehabilitation.
National Fish Hatcheries:
Albernathy, Wash.: Improve water recycling system.
Allegheny, Pa.: Grading and paving river road.
Alchesay, Ariz.: Rehab main water supply line.
Carson, Wash.: Replace waterline hatchery building.
Coleman, Calif.: Rehab diversion dam and redesign of fish holding.
Dexter, New Mexico: Replace feed storage building; replace pond bottoms,
stream habitat.
Eagle Creek, Oregon: Rehab four residences, chemical storage building.
Edenton, N.C.: Residence replacement.
Erwin, Tennessee: Road rehab.
Entiat, Wash.: Road, hatchery area.
Garrison Dam, N. Dak.: Rehab raceways, water runs.
Gavins Point, S. Dak.: Rehab ponds.
Green Lake, Maine: Roads.
Hiawatha Forest, Mich.: Rehab raceways.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Hotchkiss, Colo.: Rehab ponds sewage disposal.
Jackson, Wyo.: Raceways.
Jordan River, Mich.: Rehab raceways walls.
Kooskia, Idaho: Water temp. controls storage facility.
Lahontan, Nev.: Rehab settling basin system, rehab four wells.
Leadville, Ohio: Rehab water supply.
Leavenworth, Wash.: Replace fry troughs, holding ponds; installing valves.
Natchitochess, La.: Rehab pond bottoms/drainlines.
Nashua, New Hampshire: Road rehab; covering well.
North Attleboro, Mass.: Rehab raceways, renov. hatchery building.
Orangeburg, S.C.: Rehab ponds, water supply.
Pendills Creek, Mich.: Road, fencing.
Pittsford, Vt.: Rehab service road and fish loading.
Quinault, Wash.: Repair metal shed.
Spring Creek, Wash.: Rehab raceway ponds, remove filterbed.
Tishomingo, Okla.: Pond and raceway rehabilitation.
Welaka, Fla.: Rehab ponds.
White Sulphur Spgs, W.Va.
Willow Beach, Ariz.: Road/raceway.
Winthrop, Wash.: Modernize screen chamber standby generator.
Wytheville, Va.: Repair roads; bridges, pumps.
The illustrative list includes projects which, because of Commit-
tee guidelines, are normally funded in the construction account.
The Committee, by funding these projects in the Resource manage-
ment appropriation, is telling the Service that those guidelines do
not apply in this instance.
ASSISTING IN RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION
One of the most effective programs of the Federal government
for promoting the development and growth of rural America is the
Farmers Home Administration program for the construction of
water and sewer systems. These loan and grant funds are available
to every State in the country in communities of up to 10,000 popu-
lation. These loans and grants have the lasting benefit of providing
people in rural areas and small towns with public water systems
which will provide safe drinking water, and with sewer systems
which will help to prevent the pollution of our streams and rivers.
Information provided to the Committee indicates that as of No-
vember 23, 1982, the Farmers Home Administration had on hand
1804 applications for loans totaling $1,371,416,038 and 904 applica-
tions for grants totaling $545,081,464.
The Committee feels, based on past experience, that approxi-
mately one-half of these applications could be rapidly moved into
construction. The Committee expects that not less than 20 percent
of these funds will be used for the expansion of existing systems.
By expediting approximately one-half of these pending applica-
tions into construction, an estimated 484 new water systems will be
constructed and 414 expanded, serving an estimated 124,700 people;
and 272 sewer systems will be constructed and 232 expanded, serv-
ing an estimated 75,600 people. Construction of water and sewer
systems in rural areas is a cornerstone of rural development. With
these essential services in place, new industries are able to locate
there, in turn leading to. further economic growth. In addition, an
estimated 44,560 jobs associated with the construction of these
water and sewer systems will be created.
To provide these new water and sewer systems, the Committee
recommends an appropriation of $200,000,000 for grants to small
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
towns and $600,000,000 in loan funds. These funds, coupled with
the funds in the annual appropriation act, will restore this pro-
gram to approximately the fiscal year 1980 program level.
Because of the extremely restrictive personnel ceiling placed on
the Farmers Home Administration, additional employees and funds
for salaries and expenses will be required to carry out the afore-
mentioned program increases. Therefore, the Committee recom-
mends $6,500,000 and 400 positions. These additional positions will
be required not only to make the loans and grants, but to service
them in the future and thereby protect the government's interest.
Existing personnel limitations should be adjusted to accommodate
the additional positions provided in this bill.
The Soil Conservation Service has responsibility for developing
overall work plans for resource conservation and development in
cooperation with local sponsors; developing local programs of land
conservation and utilization; assisting local groups and individuals
in carrying out such plans and programs; conducting surveys and
investigations relating to the conditions and factors affecting such
work on private lands; and making loans to project sponsors for
conservation and development purposes and to individual operators
for establishing soil and water conservation practices. The Commit-
tee recommends an increase of $15,000,000 for resource conserva-
tion and development.
INCREASING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SOIL CONSERVATION ACTIVITIES
The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, as amend-
ed, provides for cooperation between the Federal government and
the States and their political subdivisions in a program to prevent
erosion, floodwater, and sediment damages in the watersheds of
rivers and streams and to further the conservation, development,
utilization and disposal of water.
The Committees information is that there are 432 watershed
and flood control projects currently under construction in 46 States
that could be accelerated because bids are coming in 30 percent
below estimates. The same is true of 21 new projects that are ready
for construction. These 453 projects are all approved projects that
are needed now, and the quicker finished, the greater the benefits.
The exceptionally high unemployment in the construction indus-
try caused the bids to average 30 percent below the engineering es-
timates. To accelerate work now will save the government millions
of dollars as well as provide badly needed jobs in the construction
industry.
To accelerate construction work now underway to prevent fur-
ther damage to our watersheds, prevent damage from floods, and
reduce the pollution of our streams by sedimentation; for water-
shed protection and flood control projects to provide billions of dol-
lars of protection to an estimated 1,300,000 people, the Committee
recommends an appropriation of $93,000,000.
To properly supervise and carry out this work, 400 additional po-
sitions are needed for the Soil Conservation Service. The Commit-
tee recommends $7,000,000 for these positions, and directs that ex-
isting personnel limitations should be adjusted accordingly to ac-
commodate these additional positions.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Because of the increased funding provided for watershed and
flood prevention operations of the Soil Conservation Service, addi-
tional loan funds will be required to aid local watershed districts
unable to obtain financing. The Committee estimates that an addi-
tional $25,000,000 in loan funds will be required.
FEDERAL, STATE, AND LOCAL PRISON MODERNIZATION
For the buildings and facilities program of the Federal Prison
System, the Committee recommends an additional $55,000,000
above the level provided in the FY 1983 Appropriation Bill. These
additional funds will provide for projects already developed for
badly needed modernization and repair of existing buildings and
facilities of the Federal prison system.
The Committee recommends an additional $40,000,000 above the
amount provided in the FY 1983 Appropriation Bill be transferred
to "Support of United States Prisoners" account for the Coopera-
tive Agreement Program. This program provides for expansion,
construction and upgrading of State and local detention facilities
that house Federal prisoners awaiting trial or transfer to Federal
penal institutions. Currently, insufficient space is available for con-
finement of Federal pre-trial detainees in several areas of the coun-
try. In addition, the President's Task Force on Organized Crime
has identified a requirement totaling $2,000,000,000 for moderniz-
ing and expanding approximately 700 State and local jail facilities.
The additional funds recommended by the Committee will provide
the resources necessary to enter into agreements with those State
and local governments which have developed or can develop plans
for construction, expansion or modernization of jail space. Such
agreements would guarantee the Federal government with an ag-
gregate increase in beds for Federal detainees.
ENHANCEMENT OF WATER RESOURCE AND HYDROELECTRIC POWER
BENEFITS
The Committee allowance includes a total of $145,723,000 for the
Corps of Engineers, including $40,723,000 for work on ongoing con-
struction projects. It is estimated that a total of 4,900 jobs, includ-
ing 1,600 jobs in connection with ongoing construction activity, will
be generated as a result of funding provided to the Corps in the
resolution.
.In addition, the pending FY 1983 Energy and Water Develop-
ment Appropriation Bill provides a total of 8,820 additional jobs as
a result of an increase of $236 million provided to the Corps in that
bill.
The Committee reiterates its position regarding cost sharing and
"innovative financing" of water projects as stated in H. Rept. 97-
850.
ILLUSTRATIVE LIST
CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL
Brandon Road Lock and Dam, Illinois Waterway, IL (Rehabilitation).
Montgomery Locks and Dam, Ohio River, PA (Rehabilitation).
Los Angeles River Channel, CA (Rehabilitation).
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
B. Everett Jordan Lake, NC (Recreation Facilities).
New Melones Lake, CA (Recreation Facilities).
Skiatook Lake, OK (Recreation Facilities).
Ellicott Creek, NY (Resumption).
Mouth of Colorado River, TX (Resumption).
Red River Waterway, LA (Additional Work).
Code 710 Recreation at Completed Projects.
Navigation program, section 107:
Patchogue River, Westbrook, CT.
East Point Breakwater, FL.
Kaulana Bay, HI.
Muscooten Bay, IL.
Stonington Harbor, ME.
Buttermilk Bay, Bourne, MA.
Harrisville Harbor, MI.
Lake City, MN.
Two Harbors, MN.
Warroad, MN.
Ogdenburg Harbor, NY.
Bogue Inlet, NC.
Swanquarter Bay, NC.
Charleston Boat Basin, Coos Bay, OR.
Government Island, Portland, OR.
Friday Harbor, WA.
Mitigation of shore damages, section 111:
Harrisville Harbor, MI.
Presque Isle, MI.
Beach erosion, section 103:
Willard Beach, So. Portland, ME.
Flood control, section 205:
West Springfield, MA.
Halstad, MN.
Snake River, MN.
Ararat River, Mt Airy, NC.
Enderlin, ND (Additional over Budget).
Tualatin, OR.
Eagle Creek, Dorchester Co., SC.
Humboldt, TN.
Roscoe, TX.
Wheeler Creek, Gainesville, TX.
Snagging and clearing for flood control, section 208:
Partridge Creek, IL.
Eighteen Mile Creek, NY.
Cow Castle Creek, Orangeburg, SC.
Bradford, TN.
Ashippun, WI.
Spring Creek, Spencer, WV.
Emergency streambank and shoreline protection, section 14:
Arkansas River, 4th St. Bridge, Canon City, CO.
Fountain Creek, Colorado Springs, CO.
Fountain Creek, Fountain, CO.
King Arroyo, LaJunta, CO.
Raynolds Ave Bridge, Canon City, CO.
Rio Grand River, Alamosa, CO.
State Hwy 101, Purgatorie River, Las Animas, CO.
US Hwy 25 Fountain Creek, Colorado Springs, CO.
US Hwy 29, DePue, IL.
Rosewood Beach, Highland Park, IL.
Ohio River, Rockport Landing, IN.
Patoka River, Winslow, IN.
Ohio River, Davies Co., KY.
4th St. Bridge, Florance, KS.
Hwy 362 Bridge, Osborn Creek, MS.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Hwy 362 Bridge, Wolf Creek, MS.
Lorraine Road, Bilox River, MS.
White Sand Creek, Co. Hwy 1265 Bridge, MS.
Truchas Creek, Ft. Sumner, NM.
Chichester Creek, Shandaken, NY.
St. Route 163, Marblehead, OH.
WTP, Great Miami River, Ross, OH.
Francis Road Bridge, Girard, PA.
Trout Run, Portage Borough, PA.
Concord Park, Ft. Louden Lake, TN.
Lenoir City Park, Tennessee River, TN.
Zoological Gardens, Racine, WI.
Shoshone River, Byron, WY.
The Committee has included $65,000,000 in operation and main-
tenance funds for structural repairs, roads, and maintenance
dredging at completed projects. An estimated 2,800 jobs will be cre-
ated as a result of the additional funds provided in the resolution.
Structural repairs are needed to aid in the preservation of the
integrity of the projects, and to prevent more costly repairs in the
future, if repair work is not accomplished now. Such work includes
bank stabilization, major repairs to lock miter gates, dam tainter
gates, navigation mooring piers, hydroelectric generation turbines,
debris booms, dam spillway gates, dam roller gate chains, concrete
dam piers, breakwaters, piers, jetties, replace spillway gate seal
heaters, cable wear plates on spillway gates, navigation lock lift
gate cables and wood timbers on navigation lock floating
guidewalls.
Additional Operation and Maintenance funds could also be effec-
tively used to regravel and/or repair roads to prevent future major
road rehabilitation. Also, funds could be used for resurfacing of
roads and parking areas and to repair bridge deck and seal joints.
Maintenance dredging is needed to provide adequate channel
depths for present traffic, because less than fully. authorized depths
are available, or to reduce the dredging frequency and save out
year amounts. This would also have the added benefit of improving
navigation safety by eliminating hazards to users during low water
season.
ILLUSTRATIVE LIST
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, GENERAL
ALABAMA
Alabama-Coosa Rivers, AL and GA. Millers Ferry Lock and Dam-William
Black Warrior and Tombigbee Rivers. "Bill" Dannelly Res.
Bon Secour River. Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway, AL and
Fly Creek. MS.
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. Walter F. George Lock and Dam.
Jones Bluff Lock and Dam.
Blakely Mountain Dam-Lake Ouachita. Nimrod Lake.
Bull Shoals Lake. Norfolk Lake.
Dardanelle Lock and Dam. OzarkJeta Taylor Lock and Dam.
DeGray Lake.
McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Nav.
System.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Humboldt Harbor and Bay. Sacramento River.
Los Angeles County Drainage Area. San Francisco Harbor.
Oakland Harbor. San Francisco Bay Delta Model
Redwood City Harbor. Structure.
Richmond Harbor. Santa Cruz Harbor.
DELAWARE
Inland Waterway, Delaware River to Chesapeake Bay, DE and MD.
Central and Southern Florida. Okeechobee Waterway.
Escambia and Conecuh Rivers. Port St. Joe Harbor.
Jim Woodruff Lock and Dam-Lake Tampa Harbor.
Seminole.
Allatoona Lake. Hartwell Lake.
Carters Dam. Savannah Harbor.
Clarks Hill Lake. West Point Lake.
Calumet Harbor and River. Lake Shelbyville.
Carlyle Lake. Mississippi River btn. Missouri River and
Chicago Harbor. Minneapolis IL, MN, WI and IA.
Chicago River. Rend Lake.
Illinois Waterway.
Missouri River, Kensters Bend, NE to Saylorville Lake.
Sioux City, IA.
Barkley Dam-Lake Barkley. Wolf Creek Dam-Lake Cumberland.
Ohio River Locks and Dams.
Barre Falls Dam. Hodges Village Dam.
East Brimfield Lake. Knightville Dam.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Gulf Harbor.
Okatibbee Lake.
Pascagoula Harbor.
MISSOURI
Hopkinton-Everett Lakes.
Portsmouth Harbor and Piscataqua
River.
Abiquiu Dam.
Cochiti Lake.
Almond Lake.
Wilmington Harbor.
Garrison Dam-Lake Sakakawea.
Huron Harbor.
Lorain Harbor.
Birch Lake.
Broken Bow Lake.
Denison Dam/Lake Texoma.
Eufaula Lake.
Fort Gibson Lake.
Hugo Lake.
Hulah Lake.
Kaw Lake.
Keystone Lake.
Oolagah Lake.
NORTH CAROLINA
NORTH DAKOTA
OHIO
Pat Mayse Lake.
Pine Creek Lake.
Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam and
Reservoir.
Tenkiller Lake.
Waurika Lake.
Webbers Falls Lock and Dam.
Wister Lake.
Allegheny River.
Alvin R. Bush Dam.
Conemaugh River Lake.
Crooked Creek Lake.
Curwensville Lake.
East Branch Clarion River Lake.
Foster Joseph Sayers Dam and Reservoir.
Kinzua Dam and Allegheny Reservoir.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Loyalhanna Lake.
Mononghela River.
Prompton Lake.
Raystown Lake.
Shenango River Lake.
Tioga-Hammond Lakes.
Tionesta Lake.
York Indian Rock Dam.
Big Bend Dam-Lake Sharpe.
Fort Randall Dam-Lake Francis Case.
Center Hill Lake.
Cheatham Lock and Dam.
Cordell Hull Dam and Reservoir.
Dale Hollow Lake.
Old Hickory Lock and Dam.
Tennessee River.
Bardwell Lake.
Belton Lake.
Benbrook Lake.
Buffalo Bayou and Tributaries.
Canyon Lake.
Corpus Christi Ship Channel.
Ferrells Bridge Dam-Lake O'The Pines.
Freeport Harbor.
Granger Lake.
Grapevine Lake.
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.
Hords Creek Lake.
Houston Ship Channel.
Lavon Lake.
Ball Mountain Lake.
North Hartland Lake.
Lewisville Lake.
Matagorda Ship Channel.
Navarro Mills Lake.
O. C. Fisher Dam and Lake.
Pat Mayse Lake.
Proctor Lake.
Sabine-Neches Waterway.
Sam Rayburn Dam and Reservoir.
Somerville Lake.
Stillhouse Hollow Dam.
Town Bluff Dam-B. A. Steinhagen Lake.
Waco Lake.
Whitney Lake.
Wright Patman Dam and Lake.
Chief Joseph Dam. Lower Granite Lock and Dam, WA and
Howard A. Hanson Reservoir. ID.
Ice Harbor Lock and Dam. Lower Monumental Lock and Dam.
FLOOD CONTROL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES
The Committee has included $40 million for construction and
maintenance of ongoing features of the Mississippi River and tribu-
taries flood control project. It is estimated that 500 additional jobs
will be generated as a result of this funding.
$5 million is included in the bill to advance approximately 10
items of levee enlargement and berms in the States of Louisiana,
Arkansas, Mississippi and Missouri. In FY 1983 it is estimated that
approximately 250 people would be put to work.
$3.5 million is provided for two items of levee setback in Louisi-
ana resulting in 50 additional jobs.
$31.5 million is contained in the bill for channel improvement
work in the States of Louisiana, Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee,
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Kentucky, Missouri, and Illinois which would result in the 2 revet-
ment plants initiating work approximately 2 months early employ-
ing approximately 1,400 workers. In addition, the funds would be
used for the purpose of increasing the stockpile of materials for re-
vetment work which would include casting articulated concrete
mat, the ordering of additional reinforcement and other materials.
It is estimated that approximately 200 people would be involved in
the mat casting and materials contract.
The Committee allowance includes a total of $31,600,000 for the
Bureau of Reclamation, including $10,400,000 for work on ongoing
construction projects. It is estimated that a total of 700 jobs, includ-
ing 266 jobs relating to ongoing construction work, will be generat-
ed as a result of this funding. Examples of the type of work to be
accomplished include water distribution facilities, archeological
studies, recreation facilities, boundary fencing, riprap protection,
etc.
A total of 350 additional jobs have been provided in the pending
FY 1983 Energy and Water Development Appropriation Bill as a
result of an increase of $13 million included for the Bureau proj-
ects and programs.
ILLUSTRATIVE LIST
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM
Project:
Central Arizona Project (Water).
Central Arizona Project (Non-Indian distribution system).
CUP, Bonneville Unit.
Dallas Creek, Colo.
Dolores, Colo.
Seedskadee, Wy.
Brantley, N.M.
McGee Creek, OK.
Palmetto Bend, Tex.
San Luis Valley, Closed Basin, Colo.
Wichita, OK.
Washita Basin, OK.
Mountain Park, OK.
Norman, OK.
W.C. Austin, OK.
San Angelo, Tex.
Belle Fourche, S.D.
The resolution includes $21,200,000 for operation and mainte-
nance at completed Bureau of Reclamation projects. The type of
work includes the repair of powerplants, erosion control, dredging,
levee construction, improving recreation areas, correcting seepage
at spillways, etc. It is estimated that an additional 434 jobs will be
created as a result of the funding contained in the resolution.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
47
ILLUSTRATIVE LIST
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Project:
Columbia Basin, Wash.
Minidoka Area, Idaho.
Central Valley Project, Calif.
Yuma Area Consolidated, Ariz. and Calif.
Various in Region LC, Ariz. and Calif.
Bonneville, Utah.
Middle Rio Grande, NM.
Rio Grande, NM.
Palmetto Bend, Texas.
Wichita, OK.
Washita Basin OK.
W. C. Austin, OK.
Arbuckle, OK.
Norman, OK.
Mountain Park, OK.
Carlsbad, NM.
El Vado, NM.
San Juan Chama, NM and Colo.
San Angelo, Texas.
All Projects.
P-SMBP, Yellowtail, Wyoming and Mont.
P-SMBP, Lower Marias, Mont.
P-SMBP, North Platte, Neb. and Wyoming.
EMERGENCY PRODUCTIVE JOBS
The joint resolution includes an appropriation of $1,000,000,000
for a temporary program of productive jobs for the unemployed.
The program will be six months in duration. The Committee makes
this recommendation in response to the alarming increase in un-
employment during the past year and in the belief that tangible
benefits must be derived from the expenditure of public funds.
Money spent for unemployment compensation, as necessary as it is,
does not result in repair or restoration of community facilities. The
funds provided in this joint resolution will provide for repair and
restoration of community facilities, and at the same time help to
get people off of the unemployment rolls and into productive jobs.
Local supervising officials must certify in writing that the work
was performed before any participant may be paid under this pro-
gram. About 160,000 jobs will be created through this program.
This appropriation is intended to provide an immediate, tempo-
rary response to an unemployment crisis, and to begin to turn the
tide of increasing unemployment. Long-term efforts to restore eco-
nomic health and put significant numbers of Americans back to
work on a more permanent basis should be considered in the
Ninety-eighth Congress.
Furthermore, the Committee understands that the appropriation
it is now recommending is inadequate to place even a substantial
portion of the swelling ranks of unemployed Americans into these
short-lived, emergency jobs. However, it will be a step in the right
direction.
The Committee views expeditious implementation of this pro-
gram as critical to its success and to the jobless workers it will
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
serve. For this reason, funds appropriated are to be made available
for the six-month period beginning as soon as possible after enact-
ment.
Use of funds.-The Committee intends that the temporary jobs
funded under this appropriation be in activities which are of tangi-
ble benefit to the community through repair, maintenance and re-
habilitation of public facilities, at present being neglected, and not
to replace existing workers. Jobs provided by the joint resolution
are in such activities as bridge repair and maintenance; patching
potholes and other road repair; repair and rehabilitation of water
systems; repair and rehabilitation of public buildings; erosion,
flood, drought, and storm damage assistance and control and
energy conservation.
Recipient eligibility.-Eighty-three percent of the funds appropri-
ated for productive jobs are to be allocated to eligible entities on
the basis of unemployment factors under the formula specified in
the joint resolution. Only entities serving areas with rates of unem-
ployment in excess of nine percent may be eligible under this allo-
cation. Such determination of eligibility is to be based on the best
available data for the area if data for the three months immediate-
ly preceding the allocation are not available.
Five percent of the funds are to be allocated among States that
do not qualify under the basic allocation for the purpose of serving
areas of chronically high unemployment within those States.
An eligible entity is a unit of general local government with a
population of 50,000 or more. The State will be the eligible entity
for those areas having insufficient population to qualify.
In order to provide assistance to those areas that do not qualify
under the basic formula but which have had substantial economic
disruption, the joint resolution includes language providing that 10
percent of the funds shall be allocated by the same formula among
eligible entities having an average rate of unemployment of nine
percent or below. Two percent is reserved for Indian tribes.
Participant eligibility.-Eligibility for temporary employment
under this appropriation is restricted to unemployed individuals
who have been certified as unemployed for at least 15 of the most
recent 26 weeks by the State Employment Service. The Committee
intends that priority for participation should be based on duration
of unemployment and that individuals who have exhausted unem-
ployment compensation benefits should have first priority for the
jobs created. No restriction is placed on family income as a deter-
minant of eligibility. Unemployed persons who are not eligible for
unemployment compensation are also eligible for the jobs created.
Wage and administrative provisions.-Wages paid by the Federal
government under this program shall not exceed $5,000. No person
shall be employed under this program for a period exceeding six
months. Individuals employed shall not be eligible for unemploy-
ment compensation during the period of productive job employ-
ment and shall be paid only upon certification in writing by the
supervising official that the job was performed. No currently em-
ployed worker shall be displaced by any individual employed with
funds under this joint resolution. Not more than 15 percent of the
funds may be used for administration of the program at the local
level.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
The resolution includes $232,400,000 for this account for two pro-
grams to assist unemployed youth and adults. These funds are in
addition to those contained in title I of this joint resolution. This
appropriation provides $32,400,000 for the Job Corps and
$200,000,000 for the newly-authorized program of assistance to dis-
placed workers in the Job Training Partnership Act.
Job Corps.-The Committee recommends an additional
$32,400,000 for the Job Corps. That amount, when added to the
amount provided elsewhere in this joint resolution, provides a total
1983 appropriation of $618,000,000. That is the full amount author-
ized by the Job Training Partnership Act. The additional funds will
finance about 2,300 training slots; the current enrollment level is
39,839. The Committee feels that Job Corps has been a successful
program and that now is an opportune time to provide additional
funds for it.
Displaced workers.-The Committee recommends an initial ap-
propriation of $200,000,000 for the newly-authorized title III of the
Job Training Partnership Act. This will be a comprehensive pro-
gram of training and employment services for displaced workers. It
will be administered by the States on a 50-50 matching basis. Activ-
ities funded will include job search assistance, retraining, reloca-
tion assistance, and support services. Up to 25 percent of the total
may be retained by the Secretary to provide assistance to those
areas with unexpected increases in unemployment as a result of
mass layoffs, natural disasters, Federal government actions (such
as relocation of facilities), or to areas of chronic high unemploy-
ment or designated enterprise zones. The balance is allocated by
formula among the States.
The Committee recognizes that hundreds of thousands of workers
have been displaced from their jobs and become unemployed be-
cause of structural changes in the economy. This process has been
exacerbated by the depth and severity of our current recession.
Most of these workers will not be called back after the economy im-
proves. Steps must be taken now to move these workers from the
unemployment and public assistance rolls back into the main-
stream of our economy. The Committee believes that a relatively
small amount of Federal funds invested in retraining these work-
ers in occupations for which demand exceeds supply will pay divi-
dends in the future.
INCREASING ASSISTANCE TO THE UNEMPLOYED THROUGH EMPLOYMENT
SERVICES
The resolution includes authority to expend an additional
$339,000,000 from the Unemployment Trust Fund for administra-
tive expenses of the State employment security agencies. This is in
addition to the amount authorized to be expended under title I of
this joint resolution. These are trust funds derived from proceeds
under the Federal Unemployment Tax Act.
Employment services.-The Committee recommends an additional
amount of $75,000,000 for the Employment Service. When added to
the amount in the House version of the regular appropriations bill
for 1983, that provides a total of $900,600,000. The additional funds
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
provided here will finance 3,300 additional staff in local public em-
ployment offices. The revised staff level for 1983 is 28,100. That is
still well below the staff level of 30,000 that prevailed in fiscal year
1981 and for many years prior to that. The additional funding pro-
vided here will allow the States to provide additional job-finding as-
sistance to unemployed citizens. In light of the current unemploy-
ment rate, the Committee believes that these additional staff are
critically needed.
Unemployment insurance services.-The Committee recommends
an additional amount of $264,000,000 for processing of unemploy-
ment insurance claims. That will provide an additional 11,050 tem-
porary staff in local unemployment offices nationwide. The revised
1983 totals for unemployment insurance services are $1,839,500,000
and 68,163 staff-years. Unemployment has risen substantially since
the Administration last reestimated the requirements in this ac-
count in connection with the mid-session budget review in July.
That estimate was based on the assumptions that the average
weekly volume of unemployment claims would be 4.1 million, that
the total unemployment rate would average 8.6 percent, and that
the insured unemployment rate would average 4.1 percent in fiscal
year 1983. In the most recent week for which data were available
(November 13), there were 5.6 million unemployment claims proc-
essed and the insured unemployment rate was 5.5 percent. The
total unemployment rate for November was 10.8 percent.
The Administration has not yet officially revised its unemploy-
ment projections for fiscal 1983, nor has the Congressional Budget
Office. However, one of the leading economic forecasting firms re-
cently estimated that the unemployment rate would average 10.2
percent in fiscal 1983.
It is the Committee's understanding that a total unemployment
rate of 10.2 percent would result in an insured rate of 5.1 percent
and an average weekly claims volume of 5.2 million. The Commit-
tee further understands that these workload data would require an
additional $264,000,000, to enable the States to.hire sufficient tem-
porary staff to process claims on a timely basis during the remain-
der of fiscal 1983.
The Committee has utilized this unemployment forecast in devel-
oping the requirements for this account. Should the average unem-
ployment rate turn out to be considerably higher than this, addi-
tional funding could be provided in a later bill. These funds are ap-
propriated in a contingency fund, to be made available to a State
only when the State has fully justified the need for additional staff
because of substantially increased unemployment claims volume.
The Committee is providing these funds at this time to ensure that
unemployment claims are processed on a timely basis and as accu-
rately as possible. When.States are short of claims staff at a time
of extremely high unemployment, payment delays and errors
result. We must provide the necessary resources so that States can
minimize these problems and provide adequate service to our un-
employed citizens.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
ASSISTANCE THROUGH DAY CARE SERVICES
The Committee has provided an additional $50 million for day
care services to be administered through the Title XX Social Serv-
ices Block Grant. The States would administer the funds as part of
the Title XX Block Grant but with the intent that each State's
share of the $50 million would be for day care services in addition
to what a State currently spends for child day care services.
These additional funds for child day care would serve a number
of critical needs related to the severe impact that the current reces-
sion and high unemployment is having on families with small chil-
dren and especially on female headed households.
First, for those parents who are currently employed but have
only part-time low wage jobs and must pay for the full cost of day
care for their children, the increased availability of subsidized day
care will directly increase their disposable income.
Second, day care providers in many cases, will be required to
hire additional staff to provide the additional day care services
which would be funded, thus restoring employment opportunities
for a number of unemployed day care workers.
Third, increased funding for day care services will also enable
those unemployed female heads of household who have lost their
jobs because of technological advances to have a place for their
children in day care while they participate in retraining programs.
An estimated additional 33,000 children each month would re-
ceive day care services because of these additional funds over the
$2.45 billion ceiling in Title XX in fiscal year 1983. In addition,
4,000 additional child day care workers will be employed to-provide
these additional day care services.
The bill increases the fiscal year 1983 authorization for title XX
from $2,450,000,000 to $2,500,000,000. This increases the amount to
which States are entitled under current law. The Committee in-
tends the full amount of $2,500,000,000 to be allocated among the
States in accord with the law, and further expects the Administra-
tion to request supplemental appropriations to fully fund this and
all of the other entitlement programs which were underfunded in
the President's 1983 budget request.
INCREASING HEALTH SERVICE ACTIVITIES
The bill includes $15,000,000 to expand the availability of home
health care services provided at federally funded community and
migrant health centers throughout the United States. This is in ad-
dition to the basic Federal appropriation for this program provided
in H.R. 7205, the fiscal year 1983 appropriation for the Depart-
ments of Labor, Health and Human Services and Education. The
community health center program is expected to provide care to
4,500,000 disadvantaged individuals during fiscal year 1983. Many
of these individuals have medical conditions which would require
hospitalization if not properly treated on an outpatient basis. In
order to better meet the health care needs of these patients, many
centers have initiated coordinated programs of home-based care
which have been successful in reducing the frequency of hospital
admissions. Unfortunately, budgetary constraints have forced
many centers to reduce or eliminate optional home care programs.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
The Committee is concerned that this will result in higher total
cost and unnecessary patient risk and has therefore provided
$15,000,000 to expand the home care program. The Committee
wishes to emphasize that this appropriation is not intended to sup-
plant the basic appropriation available to centers through H.R.
7205. It is intended to fund additional home health care positions.
The Department of Health and Human Services estimates that
1,250 new jobs will be created by this supplemental funding.
Economic conditions have increased the unemployment rate in
the United States to the highest level in over 40 years. This has
caused increasing numbers of individuals to look to someone else to
provide for basic needs such as food and shelter. Demands placed
on soup kitchens, food banks, and providers of emergency shelter
have dramatically increased in the past year. While efforts by pri-
vate voluntary organizations have increased, it appears these re-
sources are insufficient to serve the growing numbers of needy in-
dividuals.
To help address this problem, the Committee recommends
$50,000,000 be made available to private voluntary organizations
for emergency food and shelter programs for the needy. The fund-
ing included in this bill is to be used, in conjunction with surplus
foods from the Department of Agriculture, to supplement private
voluntary resources. It is not to be used as a substitute for existing
resources.
The $50,000,000 appropriated to the Federal Emergency Manage-
ment Agency is to be given to the United Way of America within
45 days of enactment of this joint resolution. As soon as possible
after enactment of this legislation, the United Way is to constitute
a special board to determine how the funds are to be distributed to
local private voluntary organizations. The board is to consist of
seven members. Each of the following organizations shall designate
a representative to the board and the United Way of America shall
determine two other private voluntary organizations which will
each designate an individual to be on the board. The five organiza-
tions are (1) United Way of America, (2) Salvation Army, (3) Coun-
cil of Churches, (4) National Conference of Catholic Charities, and
(5) Council of Jewish Federations, Inc.
While leaving the distribution of funds to the special board, the
private organizations eligible to participate in the program should:
(1) be non-profit;
(2) have a voluntary board;
(3) have an accounting system; and
(4) practice non-discrimination.
Participation in the program should not be limited to private vol-
untary organizations that are part of a national organization. The
Committee is aware of a number of agencies not associated with a
national organization that have the ability to deliver services.
The Committee expects that the $50,000,000 for the emergency
food and shelter program will be spent prior to the end of fiscal
year 1983. After the funds have been expended, the Federal Emer-
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
gency Management Agency is to conduct a post-audit of fund utili-
zation.
Finally, the Committee has included language in this joint reso-
lution that limits administrative costs paid from the appropriation
to two percent. While recognizing that some administrative costs
are unavoidable, the $50,000,000 appropriation is primarily to be
used for providing emergency food and shelter.
CONSTRUCTION AND MODERNIZATION HOUSING UNITS FOR MILITARY
FAMILIES
The Committee recommends providing $489,485,000 for job stimu-
lation under Military Construction, Family Housing. These funds,
which are separate appropriations not supplemental to those previ-
ously appropriated in fiscal year 1983, will provide both direct and
indirect stimulation to the housing construction industry in the
United States. The provision of these funds will create approxi-
mately 18,500 construction jobs. The family housing job stimulus
will also improve the quality of life in the military since the family
housing program has a large backlog of new construction, improve-
ment, and repair and maintenance requirements that will be
moved forward in priority. A sufficient degree of planning has oc-
curred on all projects recommended for funding in this section to
insure their orderly execution. The recommended funding is dis-
tributed in the following manner:
DISTRIBUTION OF FAMILY HOUSING FUNDS
[In thousands of dollars]
Jobs
created
New Construction .................................................................................
$30,575
$24,600
$4,000
$59,175
1,800
Improvements .......................................................................................
55,915
16,053
41,310
113,278
4,000
Maintenance and repair ........................................................................
154,242
32,301
130,489
317,032
12,700
Total .......................................................................................
240,732
72,954
175,799
489,485
18,500
It is the intent of the Committee that the funds provided be used
for projects within the United States and its territories only and
that the Committees on Appropriations be notified of the program
accomplished on a quarterly basis.
New construction.-A total of $59.2 million has been provided for
construction of 618 new housing units at various installations.
Each project is listed by location in the appropriate Service section.
The projects that have been recommended can be under construc-
tion in 1983 and will create approximately 1,800 new construction
jobs.
Improvements.-A total of $113.3 million has been provided to
modernize and upgrade existing housing units. These improve-
ments are listed by location in the appropriate Service section. The
projects can be under construction in 1983 and will stimulate ap-
proximately 4,000 additional construction jobs.
Maintenance and repair.-A total of $317 million has been pro-
vided for maintenance and repair projects. These projects, which
include roofing, painting, plumbing, window repair, etc., are labor
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
intensive and can be implemented quickly. It is the intent of the
Committee that this funding be used only for installations as stipu-
lated in the Service sections that follow. The recommended pro-
gram will create almost 13,000 construction and related jobs.
FAMILY HOUSING, ARMY
The Committee has recommended $240,732,000 for Family Hous-
ing, Army. This includes $30,575,000 for construction, $55,915,000
for improvements, and $154,242,000 for maintenance and repair.
Construction:
Alaska:
Bethel, 2 units.
Kotzebue, 2 units.
Nome, 2 units.
Georgia: Fort Stewart, 100 units lower grade enlisted housing.
Hawaii, Aliamanu Military Reservation, Community center (Phase II).
Louisiana: Fort Polk, 150 units.
Improvements:
Arizona: Yuma Proving Ground.
Georgia: Fort Stewart.
Kentucky: Fort Campbell.
Massachusetts: Fort Devens.
Maryland:
Aberdeen Proving Ground.
Fort Meade.
New Jersey:
Fort Dix.
Fort Monmouth.
New York: Seneca Army Depot.
Oklahoma: Fort Sill.
Pennsylvania: Letterkenny Army Depot.
Texas: Fort Sam Houston
Utah: Dugway Proving Ground.
Washington: Fort Lewis.
Maintenance and Repair:
Alabama:
Anniston Army Depot.
Fort McClellan.
Redstone Arsenal.
Alaska: Fort Richardson.
Arizona:
Fort Huachuca.
Yuma Proving Ground.
California:
Fort Irwin.
Fort Ord.
Presidio of San Francisco.
Colorado:
Fort Carson.
Rocky Mountain Arsenal.
Georgia:
Fort Benning.
Fort McPherson.
Illinois:
Fort Sheridan.
Joliet Army Ammunition Plant.
Rock Island Arsenal.
Indiana:
Fort Benjamin Harrison.
Jefferson Proving Ground.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Iowa: Iowa Army Ammunition Plant.
Kansas:
Fort Leavenworth.
Fort Leonard Wood.
Fort Riley.
Kentucky:
Fort Campbell.
Fort Knox.
Louisiana:
Fort Polk.
Louisiana Army Ammunition Plant.
Maryland:
Aberdeen Proving Ground.
Fort Meade.
Massachusetts:
Fort Devens.
Natick Laboratories.
U.S. Material and Mechanics Research Center.
Michigan: Selfridge Army National Guard.
New Jersey: Fort Dix.
New Mexico: White Sands Missile Range.
North Carolina: Fort Bragg.
Oklahoma: Fort Sill.
Pennsylvania: Carlisle Barracks.
South Carolina: Fort Jackson.
Texas:
Fort Bliss.
Fort Hood.
Fort Sam Houston.
Utah: Dugway Proving Ground.
Virginia: Fort Lee.
Washington: Fort Lewis.
FAMILY HOUSING, NAVY AND MARINE CORPS
The Committee has recommended $72,954,000 for Family Hous-
ing, Navy. This includes $24,600,000 for construction, $16,053,000
for improvements, and $32,301,000 for maintenance and repair.
Construction: Florida: NS Mayport, 312 units.
Improvements:
Arizona: MCAS Yuma.
California:
MCLB Barstow.
MCB Camp Pendleton.
MCAS El Toro.
MCAGCC Twentynine Palms.
District of Columbia: Marine Barracks, Washington.
Georgia: MCLB Albany.
Hawaii: MCAS Kaneohe Bay.
Missouri: MCFC Kansas City.
North Carolina:.
MCB Camp Lejeune.
MCAS Cherry Point.
South Carolina:
MCAS Beaufort.
MCRD Parris Island.
Virginia: MCD&EC Quantico.
Maintenance and Repair:
California:
PWC San Diego.
PWC San Francisco.
Connecticut: NSB New London.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
FAMILY HOUSING, AIR FORCE
The Committee has recommended $175,799,000 for Family Hous-
ing, Air Force. This includes $4,000,000 for construction,
$41,310,000 for improvements, and $130,489,000 for maintenance
and repair.
Construction: Montana: Forsyth AFB, 50 units.
Improvements:
Alaska:
Elmendorf AFB.
Eielson AFB.
Arizona:
Davis-Monthan AFB.
Williams AFB.
California:
Edwards AFB.
Mather AFB.
Florida:
Eglin AFB.
Hurlburt AFB.
Patrick AFB.
Georgia: Robins AFB.
Hawaii: Hickam AFB.
Idaho: Mountain Home AFB.
Illinois:
Chanute AFB.
Scott AFB.
Louisiana: Barksdale AFB.
Maine: Loring AFB.
Michigan:
K. I. Sawyer AFB.
Wurtsmith AFB.
Montana: Havre AFB.
New Mexico: Kirtland AFB.
New York: Plattsburgh AFB.
North Carolina: SeymourJohnson AFB.
Oklahoma: Tinker AFB.
Texas:
Bergstrom AFB.
Goodfellow AFB.
Virginia: Langley AFB.
Maintenance and Repair:
Alaska:
Eielson AFB.
Elmendorf AFB.
Alabama: Maxwell AFB.
Arizona:
Davis-Monthan AFB.
Williams AFB.
Arkansas: Little Rock AFB.
California:
Beale AFB.
Castle AFB.
Edwards AFB.
George AFB.
March AFB.
Mather AFB.
McClellan AFB.
Travis AFB.
Vandenberg AFB.
Colorado:
Air Force Academy.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Lowry AFB.
Peterson AFB.
Delaware: Dover AFB.
Florida:
Eglin AFB.
Homestead AFB.
Hurlburt AFB.
MacDill AFB.
Patrick AFB.
Tyndall AFB.
Georgia:
Moody AFB.
Robins AFB.
Guam: Andersen AFB.
Hawaii: Hickman AFB.
Idaho: Mountain Home AFB.
Illinois:
Chanute AFB.
Scott AFB.
Indiana: Grissom AFB.
Kansas: McConnell AFB.
Louisiana:
Barksdale AFB.
England AFB.
Maine: Loring AFB.
Maryland:
Andrews AFB.
Bolling AFB.
Massachusetts: L.G. Hanscom AFB.
Michigan:
K.I. Sawyer AFB.
Wurtsmith AFB.
Mississippi:
Columbus AFB.
Keesler AFB.
Missouri: Whiteman AFB.
Montana:
Havre AFB.
Malmstrom AFB.
Nebraska: Offutt AFB.
Nevada: Nellis AFB.
New Hampshire: Pease AFB.
New Jersey: McGuire AFB.
New Mexico:
Cannon AFB.
Holloman AFB.
Kirtland AFB.
New York:
Griffiss AFB.
Plattsburgh AFB.
North Carolina:
Pope AFB.
Seymour-Johnson AFB.
North Dakota:
Grand Forks AFB.
Minot AFB.
Ohio: Wright-Patterson AFB.
Oklahoma:
Altus AFB.
Tinker AFB.
South Carolina:
Charleston AFB.
Myrtle Beach AFB.
Shaw AFB.
South Dakota: Ellsworth AFB.
Texas:
Bergstrom AFB.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
Brooks AFB.
Carswell AFB.
Dyess AFB.
Goodfellow AFB.
Kelly AFB.
Lackland AFB.
Laughlin AFB.
Randolph AFB.
Reese AFB.
Sheppard AFB.
Utah: Hill AFB.
Virginia: Langley AFB.
Washington:
Fairchild AFB.
McChord AFB.
Wyoming: F. E. Warren AFB.
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $250,000,000 for
the low-income weatherization program. Since its inception, this
program has provided energy conservation measures to approxi-
mately 1,000,000 homes. This effort makes possible more comfort-
able homes and reduced energy bills for low-income families, re-
duced energy imports for the country and jobs for those who manu-
facture and install the insulation, caulking and storm windows.
A conservative estimate of the number of low-income homes re-
maining to be weatherized is 6,000,000. The amount provided here
will weatherize an additional 250,000 low income homes in both
urban and rural settings which will result in annual savings of be-
tween 500,000 to 1,000,000 barrels of oil equivalent. The direct
labor involved is sufficient to put 4,750 people to work for one year.
This is based on an estimate of 38 hours of direct labor to weather-
ize an individual home. Additional jobs would also be created by
the demand generated for weatherization materials.
This appropriation would provide $100,000,000 for the purchase
of approximately 15,000 motor vehicles to update and replace over-
age and fuel-inefficient motor vehicles in the federal fleet.
Purchase of these vehicles would provide approximately 2,000
jobs in the automotive and related industries.
RESCISSION OF FUNDS
Pursuant to Clause 1(b), Rule X of the House of Representatives,
the following statement is made describing the rescission of funds
provided for in the accompanying joint resolution.
The Committee recommends the proposed rescission of not more
than $105,160,000 of contract authority under the rent supplement
program in the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
The Department intends to convert 60,000 existing rent supple-
ment units to the Section 8 program in 1983. Thus, after amend-
ments to projects remaining under contract in the rent supplement
program, up to $105,160,000 in contract authority is no longer re-
quired.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
TRANSFER OF FUNDS
Pursuant to Clause 1(b), Rule X of the House of Representatives,
the following statement is made describing the transfer of funds
provided in the accompanying joint resolution.
The Committee recommends that $1,000,000 be transferred from
the funds made available to the Veterans Administration's General
Operating Expenses account in the Department of Housing and
Urban Development-Independent Agencies Appropriation Act,
1983, to the VA's Medical Care account for support of the decen-
tralized hospital computer program.
INFLATIONARY IMPACT STATEMENT
Clause 204) of rule XI of the House of Representatives requires
that each Committee report on a bill or resolution shall contain a
statement as to whether enactment of such bill or resolution may
have an inflationary impact on prices and costs in the operation of
the national economy.
In view of the levels of funding which obtain under the mechan-
ics of the resolution, it is the judgment of the Committee that its
enactment will not have an additional inflationary impact on
prices and costs in the operation of the national economy.
COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XIII, CLAUSE 3
The following is submitted in compliance with clause 3 of rule
XIII of the House of Representatives:
The accompanying joint resolution would amend subsection (c) of
section 4 of the Commission on Wartime Relocation and Intern-
ment of Civilians Act (50 U.S.C. App. 1981 note) by striking out
(per bracket) and inserting (per italicized matter), as follows:
(c) The Commission [shall submit a written report of its
findings and recommendations to Congress not later than
December 31, 1982.] may make available to the public
such interim findings and other information as it deems
appropriate and shall submit a written report of its find-
ings and recommendations to Congress not later than June
30, 1983.
The accompanying joint resolution would amend an administra-
tive provision for the Veterans Administration in Title II of the De-
partment of Housing and Urban Development-Independent Agen-
cies Appropriation Act, 1983 by striking out (per bracket) as fol-
lows:
[Not to exceed $35,000,000 of the foregoing appropri-
ations shall be available for medical automatic data proc-
essing services as set forth in the budget justifications
without the approval of the Committees on Appropri-
ations.]
The accompanying joint resolution would amend section 305(b) of
the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1982 (96 Stat. 763) by in-
serting (per italicized matter) as follows:
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
 Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2
(b) The amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply to
annuities which commence on or after October 1, 1982,
except for those individuals who serve three days or less in
the month of retirement.
The accompanying joint resolution would amend section 2003(c)
of the Social Security Act by striking out (per bracket) and insert-
ing (per italicized matter), as follows:
(c) The amount specified for purposes of subsections (a)
and (b) shall be-
(1) $2,400,000,000 for the fiscal year 1982;
(2) [$2,450,000,000] $2,500,000,000 for fiscal year 1983;
(3) $2,500,000,000 for the fiscal year 1984;
(4) $2,600,000,000 for the fiscal year 1985; and
(5) $2,700,000,000 for the fiscal year 1986 or any succeed-
ing fiscal year.
Of the amount specified for purposes of subsections (a)
and (b) in paragraph (2) (for the fiscal year 1983),
$50,000,000 shall be available only for purposes of child
day care services, including but not limited to services de-
scribed in section 2007.
COMPLIANCE WITH RULE XI, CLAUSE 2
In compliance with Rule XI, clause 2, the Committee states that
this resolution was reported out favorably by a record vote of 25
Yeas to 19 Nays.
Approved For Release 2008/09/12 : CIA-RDP85M01133R000100140002-2