2027 Spending Bill for Interior, EPA, and Forest Service

What to know

• Federal funding for endangered species protections is cut off for the sage-grouse, lesser prairie-chicken, northern long-eared bat, wolverine, and seven freshwater mussel species.
• Gray wolves and grizzly bears must be removed from the endangered species list in two Western areas. No court can review those removals.
• Several 2024 Bureau of Land Management rules are defunded. The rules cover conservation, oil and gas leasing, and Alaska petroleum reserve management.
• Tribes can move funds between two Indian affairs agencies more easily. But the Navajo-Hopi relocation office must close by September 30, 2026.
• The bill bans federal spending on diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. It also bars use of the social cost of carbon in cost-benefit reviews.
• Counties with federal land get a new payment formula. The formula uses 2027 instead of 2019 as the base year.

Heads up

20 buried provisions

Provisions we flagged do not match the bill's stated purpose, or repeat language from bills that did not pass on their own.

Section by section

1. Overall funding authorization for Interior and environment agencies

   This section is the opening clause of the appropriations bill. It authorizes spending from the U.S. Treasury for the Department of the Interior, environmental agencies, and related agencies. The money covers the fiscal year that ends September 30, 2027. The specific dollar amounts for each agency and program are set out in the sections that follow this one.

   Who this affects

   Federal agencies under the Department of the Interior and related environmental bodies. Indirectly affects the public lands, natural resources, and environmental programs those agencies manage.

   Tradeoff

   Authorizing this spending funds federal land and environment programs but draws from the Treasury, adding to federal expenditures.

   Show the exact bill text

   That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Department of the Interior, environment, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027

2. Emergency repair of damaged facilities

   This section lets the Department of the Interior use existing budget funds to fix or replace aircraft, buildings, utilities, or other property that was damaged by fire, flood, storms, or similar unavoidable events. The Secretary of the Interior must approve any such spending or transfer of funds. However, this option can only be used after all funds set aside specifically for Interior Department emergencies have been spent. Any money used this way must be paid back through a separate supplemental appropriation, and the department must request that replacement funding as soon as possible.

   Who this affects

   The Department of the Interior and its bureaus and offices. Indirectly affects anyone who relies on Interior Department facilities, such as national park visitors and staff.

   Tradeoff

   This gives the department flexibility to respond quickly to emergencies, but it pulls from existing budgets and requires Congress to later approve replacement funds.

   Show the exact bill text

   no funds shall be made available under this authority until funds specifically made available to the Department of the Interior for emergencies shall have been exhausted

3. Emergency spending authority for Interior Department lands

   This section lets the Secretary of the Interior spend or move existing multi-year funds to handle emergencies on federal lands. Covered emergencies include wildland fires, earthquakes, floods, volcanoes, oil spills, hazardous chemical releases, and grasshopper or cricket outbreaks. It also lets the agency step in if a state stops enforcing surface mining rules. For wildland fires, the Secretary can only tap these extra funds when regular fire suppression money will run out within 30 days. Any emergency money spent this way must later be paid back through a separate request to Congress called a supplemental appropriation. That payback is split across all the accounts the money was taken from.

   Who this affects

   Federal land managers and Interior Department agencies responding to natural disasters or environmental emergencies. States that manage surface mining programs could also be affected if their oversight authority is challenged.

   Tradeoff

   Giving the agency flexible emergency spending speeds up disaster response, but it requires Congress to later approve repayment funds, which adds to the federal budget.

   Show the exact bill text

   no funds shall be made available under this authority until the Secretary determines that funds appropriated for wildland fire suppression shall be exhausted within 30 days

4. Allowed spending for Interior Department operations

   This section lists specific things the Interior Department can spend its money on. The total budget for this section cannot go over $500,000. Allowed expenses include hiring expert consultants, buying and replacing vehicles (including law enforcement vehicles), using aircraft, buying reprints of published materials, paying for phone service at remote field offices, and paying dues for library memberships. The Secretary of the Interior must approve most of these expenses.

   Who this affects

   Interior Department staff and field workers, as well as contractors and consultants hired by the department.

   Tradeoff

   Allowing these operational expenses gives the department flexibility to do its work, but the $500,000 cap limits how much can be spent.

   Show the exact bill text

   in total amount not to exceed $500,000; purchase and replacement of motor vehicles, including specially equipped law enforcement vehicles; hire, maintenance, and operation of aircraft

5. Indian trust management funding flexibility

   This section allows money given to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Indian Education, and the Bureau of Trust Funds Administration to be spent on, or moved to, Indian trust management and reform activities. Leftover money from past years under those same budget lines can also be used this way. However, funds set aside for settlement support cannot exceed the amounts that this Act specifically names for that purpose. Whenever money is spent or moved under this rule, the Secretary must tell the House and Senate Appropriations Committees within 60 days, explaining how much was moved and what it will be used for.

   Who this affects

   Federal agencies managing Indian trust funds and tribal communities that rely on those funds. Congressional appropriations committees receive required notifications.

   Tradeoff

   The flexibility lets agencies shift funds quickly to trust management needs, but it limits settlement support spending and requires reporting to Congress to maintain oversight.

   Show the exact bill text

   The Secretary shall notify the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations within 60 days of the expenditure or transfer of any funds under this section, including the amount expended or transferred and how the funds will be used.

6. Tribal funding redistribution with limits

   This section lets the Secretary of the Interior move money between tribes. The money involved is called Tribal Priority Allocation funds. The goal is to fix unfair funding gaps. The Secretary can shift funds when a tribe has unmet needs, when people are being counted by two tribes at once (dual enrollment), when service areas overlap, or when past math errors led to wrong payments. In most cases, no tribe can lose more than 10 percent of its funding in 2027. But if the problem is dual enrollment, overlapping service areas, or a past math error, that 10 percent protection does not apply.

   Who this affects

   Federally recognized tribes that receive Tribal Priority Allocation funds from the Interior Department.

   Tradeoff

   Some tribes may gain needed funding, but others could lose more than 10 percent of their allocation if dual enrollment, overlapping service areas, or past errors are found.

   Show the exact bill text

   No Tribe shall receive a reduction in Tribal Priority Allocation funds of more than 10 percent in fiscal year 2027. Under circumstances of dual enrollment, overlapping service areas or inaccurate distribution methodologies, the 10 percent limitation does not apply.

7. Offshore facility inspection fees for 2027

   This section sets the inspection fees that offshore facility operators must pay the federal government in fiscal year 2027. Fees vary by type of facility. Fixed platforms above the waterline pay between $10,500 and $31,500 per year, depending on how many wells they have. Drilling rigs pay per inspection: $30,500 for deep water (500 feet or more) and $16,700 for shallower water. Non-rig well units pay $4,470 to $13,260 per inspection based on water depth. Offshore wind facilities pay annual fees of $7,300 to $15,400 for visual checks, plus $72,800 per physical inspection of a turbine or substation. All fees go into the Offshore Safety and Environmental Enforcement account. Payment is generally due within 30 days of billing.

   Who this affects

   Companies that operate oil, gas, or wind facilities on the Outer Continental Shelf. This includes operators of fixed platforms, drilling rigs, non-rig well units, and offshore wind projects.

   Tradeoff

   The fees fund federal safety inspections of offshore facilities, but they add a direct cost that operators must pay.

   Show the exact bill text

   Fees for fiscal year 2027 shall be— (1) $10,500 for facilities with no wells, but with processing equipment or gathering lines; (2) $17,000 for facilities with 1 to 10 wells, with any combination of active or inactive wells; and (3) $31,500 for facilities with more than 10 wells, with any combination of active or inactive wells.

8. Long-term care contracts for wild horses and burros

   This section lets the Interior Department make agreements with nonprofit groups and other organizations to care for extra wild horses and burros on private land. These agreements can last up to 10 years. The Secretary can renew them if needed. Normally, federal contracts of this type are limited to 5 years, but this section removes that limit for these specific agreements.

   Who this affects

   Nonprofit organizations and other groups that care for wild horses and burros on private land. It also affects the wild horses and burros held by the federal government.

   Tradeoff

   Longer contracts give care providers more stability but commit federal resources to private land arrangements for up to 10 years at a time.

   Show the exact bill text

   the Secretary of the Interior may enter into multiyear cooperative agreements with nonprofit organizations and other appropriate entities...for the long-term care and maintenance of excess wild free roaming horses and burros...Such cooperative agreements and contracts may not exceed 10 years, subject to renewal at the discretion of the Secretary.

9. Hatchery salmon marking requirement

   This section tells the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to mark certain hatchery-raised fish before releasing them. The fish must come from federally run or federally funded hatcheries. The rule covers coho salmon, chinook salmon, and steelhead. Each fish must carry a visible mark that fishers can easily see. The goal is to let fishers tell hatchery fish apart from wild fish. This matters because wild salmon are often protected under endangered species rules, while hatchery fish may be caught legally.

   Who this affects

   Commercial and recreational fishers who catch salmon and steelhead. Also affects federal hatchery operators who must apply the markings before fish are released.

   Tradeoff

   Marking hatchery fish costs money and labor, but it allows fishers to harvest those fish without accidentally keeping protected wild fish.

   Show the exact bill text

   Marked fish must have a visible mark that can be readily identified by commercial and recreational fishers.

10. Indian Affairs flexible billing with state, local, and tribal partners

    This section lets the Bureau of Indian Affairs record spending commitments against money it expects to receive from state, local, and tribal governments. Normally, agencies must have funds in hand before committing to spend them. This rule allows Indian Affairs to book those obligations before the money actually arrives. One limit applies: at the end of fiscal year 2027, total obligations cannot exceed total available funds.

    Who this affects

    The Bureau of Indian Affairs and the state, local, and tribal governments that partner with it on cooperative work.

    Tradeoff

    This flexibility lets Indian Affairs start cooperative projects sooner, but it also means the agency is committing funds based on money that has not yet been received.

    Show the exact bill text

    Indian Affairs may record obligations against accounts receivable from any such entities, except that total obligations at the end of the fiscal year shall not exceed total budgetary resources available at the end of the fiscal year.

11. Hiring older Americans for Interior Department programs

    This section lets the Secretary of the Interior give grants or sign agreements with nonprofit groups. Those groups are approved by the Department of Labor under the Older Americans Act. The purpose is to bring older Americans into programs run by the Interior Department. Before any grant or agreement is signed, the Secretary must check three things. First, the work must not push out current Department employees or cut their hours, pay, or benefits. Second, older-American workers cannot fill a role if a federal employee was already laid off from that same type of job within the Department. Third, the arrangement must not interfere with existing service contracts.

    Who this affects

    Older Americans seeking work through federally approved nonprofits. Current and recently laid-off Interior Department employees.

    Tradeoff

    The program creates job opportunities for older Americans but adds rules to make sure those opportunities do not come at the expense of existing federal workers.

    Show the exact bill text

    Prior to awarding any grant or agreement under subsection (a), the Secretary shall ensure that the agreement would not— (1) result in the displacement of individuals currently employed by the Department, including partial displacement through reduction of non-overtime hours, wages, or employment benefits

12. Spending deadline for Interior Department funds

    This section sets a time limit on when the Department of the Interior can start using the money provided by this law. The department must commit and spend those funds within 60 days of the law being signed. This is meant to keep money from sitting unused for too long after the bill passes.

    Who this affects

    The Department of the Interior and any programs or projects that receive funding through this law.

    Tradeoff

    Setting a 60-day deadline pushes the department to act quickly, but it may leave little time to plan how to spend the money well.

    Show the exact bill text

    Amounts appropriated by this Act to the Department of the Interior shall be available for obligation and expenditure not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act.

13. Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education fund transfers

    This section lets the Secretary of the Interior move money between the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Bureau of Indian Education as they set up separate accounts. The two agencies are going through a reorganization. Any money transfers must follow the reprogramming rules set out elsewhere in this Act. Reprogramming rules require the agency to notify or get approval from Congress before moving funds.

    Who this affects

    The Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Indian Education, and the communities and tribal members they serve.

    Tradeoff

    Allowing fund transfers gives the agencies flexibility during a complex reorganization, but the reprogramming rules limit how freely money can be moved without congressional oversight.

    Show the exact bill text

    may transfer funds among and between the successor offices and bureaus affected by the reorganization only in conformance with the reprogramming guidelines described in this Act.

14. Update to Payment in Lieu of Taxes base year

    This section changes a date in an existing federal law about Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT). PILT sends money to counties that contain federal lands. Those counties cannot collect property taxes on federal land. The original law used fiscal year 2019 as a reference year for its payment formula. This section swaps that reference year out and puts fiscal year 2027 in its place. That update adjusts how payments to counties are calculated for the new budget year.

    Who this affects

    Counties and local governments that contain large amounts of federal land, such as national forests and public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management.

    Tradeoff

    Updating the reference year can raise or lower the payments local governments receive, depending on how federal land values and formulas have changed since 2019.

    Show the exact bill text

    Section 6906 of title 31, United States Code, shall be applied by substituting fiscal year 2027 for fiscal year 2019.

15. Tribal schools access to government vehicles

    This section lets federally recognized Indian Tribes and tribal organizations use government motor vehicles for their school programs. To qualify, a tribe or organization must receive a Tribally Controlled School Grant. Right now, easy access to interagency vehicles is linked to a different law called the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. This section gives school grant recipients the same vehicle access as if they were operating under that other law. It applies no matter what other rules might say otherwise.

    Who this affects

    Federally recognized Indian Tribes and authorized tribal organizations that receive Tribally Controlled School Grants.

    Tradeoff

    Tribes gain easier access to government vehicles for school activities, but this expands use of the federal interagency vehicle fleet beyond its usual program boundaries.

    Show the exact bill text

    may obtain interagency motor vehicles and related services for performance of any activities carried out under such grants to the same extent as if they were contracting under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975

16. Higher minimum pay for federal real property appraisers

    This section lets the Secretary of the Interior pay certain federal appraisers more than the standard minimum rate. It applies to appraisers in grades 11 through 15 who do real property appraisals or appraisal reviews for the Department of the Interior. The pay boost can be up to 15 percent above the normal minimum rate for their grade. The increase must follow existing federal pay rules in title 5 of U.S. Code.

    Who this affects

    Federal employees in the Appraiser job series (GS-1171), grades 11 through 15, who work for the Department of the Interior's Appraisal and Valuation Services Office.

    Tradeoff

    Paying appraisers more may help the Department attract and keep qualified staff, but it increases personnel costs for fiscal year 2027.

    Show the exact bill text

    funds made available in this or any other Act or otherwise made available to the Department of the Interior for the Appraisal and Valuation Services Office may be used by the Secretary of the Interior to establish higher minimum rates of basic pay for employees of the Department of the Interior in the Appraiser (GS–1171) job series at grades 11 through 15...at rates no greater than 15 percent above the minimum rates of basic pay normally scheduled

17. Block on greater sage-grouse endangered species rules

    This section stops the Interior Department from spending any money on greater sage-grouse listing actions. The Secretary cannot write, propose, or finalize any rule to list the bird under the Endangered Species Act. The Secretary also cannot enforce or carry out any threatened or endangered status for the bird or any separate population group of the bird. The block applies to funds from this bill and any other federal funding.

    Who this affects

    The Interior Department and its staff are blocked from acting on sage-grouse listings. Landowners, ranchers, and energy developers in Western states where the bird lives would not face federal land-use restrictions tied to an endangered listing.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking the listing process may ease restrictions on land and resource use in the West, but it also prevents federal protections that supporters say the bird needs to avoid population decline.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used by the Secretary of the Interior, pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973— (1) to write or issue a proposed or final rule with regard to the greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) or any distinct population segment of greater sage-grouse

18. National Park Service administrative matching grants for state conservation programs

    This section lets the National Park Service keep up to 7 percent of the State Conservation Grants program funds. Those kept funds are then given to states, Washington D.C., and U.S. territories as matching grants. The money helps those places pay for the costs of running their own conservation programs. The legal authority for this comes from a specific part of federal law covering outdoor recreation grants.

    Who this affects

    State governments, Washington D.C., and U.S. territories that receive federal conservation grants. Their program administrators would get help covering operating costs.

    Tradeoff

    Allowing up to 7 percent of grant funds to cover administrative costs means slightly less money goes directly to conservation projects, but it helps states afford to run the programs.

    Show the exact bill text

    the National Park Service may retain up to 7 percent of the State Conservation Grants program to provide to States, the District of Columbia, and insular areas, as matching grants to support state program administrative costs.

19. Historic preservation funding year update

    This section updates a historic preservation law. It replaces the year '2023' with '2027' in a specific part of federal law (Section 303102 of title 54). That law deals with funding for the Historic Preservation Fund. By swapping the year, Congress keeps that fund active and authorized through fiscal year 2027 instead of letting it expire at the 2023 reference date.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies, state historic preservation offices, and organizations that receive grants from the Historic Preservation Fund.

    Tradeoff

    Extending the fund keeps historic preservation grants flowing, but it also continues federal spending on those programs for another year.

    Show the exact bill text

    Section 303102 of title 54, United States Code, shall be applied by substituting fiscal year 2027 for fiscal year 2023.

20. Interior Department bureau cost-sharing and staff-sharing

    This section lets the Secretary of the Interior set up agreements between different bureaus and offices within the department during 2027 and 2028. The bureaus can share office space, utilities, and equipment. They can also temporarily share staff for up to five business days without charging each other. Each bureau involved must pay a share of costs that matches its share of the benefit. The Secretary can move money between bureaus in advance or after the fact to cover these shared costs.

    Who this affects

    Interior Department bureaus and offices, and their staff. Taxpayers may benefit if sharing reduces overhead costs.

    Tradeoff

    Sharing resources could lower costs, but tracking who pays what share adds administrative work.

    Show the exact bill text

    detailing or assigning staff on a nonreimbursable basis for up to 5 business days

21. Block on Lava Ridge Wind Project approvals

    This section stops any money in the bill from being used on the Lava Ridge Wind Project. Specifically, no funds can go toward issuing a right-of-way permit for the project. No funds can go toward processing or approving a notice to proceed. No funds can go toward approving any construction or operating activities tied to that project's right-of-way authorization. In short, the project cannot move forward using money from this bill.

    Who this affects

    The developers of the Lava Ridge Wind Project and the federal agency staff who would otherwise process the project's permits. Communities and landowners near the proposed project site in Idaho are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking the project prevents wind energy development on that land but also delays or stops potential electricity generation and any related economic activity tied to the project.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this Act may be obligated or expended for the purpose of issuing a right-of-way, or processing or approving any notice to proceed or related action, to approve any construction or operational activities relating to the Lava Ridge Wind Project right-of-way authorization.

22. Faster review of mining claims near Public Land Order 7921

    This section tells the Bureau of Land Management to move quickly when a mining claimant asks for a validity check. A validity determination decides whether a mining claim is legally sound. The check must cover claims located in the area affected by Public Land Order 7921. If a claimant asks, the Bureau must treat that review as a priority. The Bureau should finish the review within 3 years of receiving the request.

    Who this affects

    People or companies that hold mining claims in the land area covered by Public Land Order 7921. Bureau of Land Management staff who handle validity reviews are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Miners get faster decisions on their claims, but the Bureau must dedicate staff time and resources to speed up these reviews, which may slow other work.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Bureau of Land Management shall prioritize completion of a validity determination for such claim. The Bureau of Land Management shall strive to complete any such validity determination not later than 3 years of receipt of the request.

23. Limits on banning lead ammunition and fishing tackle on federal land

    This section stops federal agencies from banning or restricting lead ammunition or fishing tackle on federal land and water. A ban or new rule can only happen if two conditions are both met. First, the Secretary of the Interior must find that lead from ammunition or tackle is the main cause of a wildlife population drop on that specific piece of land or water. That finding must be based on field data from that exact location. Second, the rule must either match state law or state fish and wildlife policy, or be approved by the state fish and wildlife agency. If the Secretary does move forward with a restriction, the agency must publish a Federal Register notice explaining how the rule meets these requirements.

    Who this affects

    Hunters and anglers who use lead ammunition or tackle on federal land and water. It also affects federal land managers and state fish and wildlife agencies.

    Tradeoff

    Hunters and anglers keep access to lead gear unless specific local data proves harm, but wildlife protection rules become harder to put in place quickly.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to prohibit the use of lead ammunition or tackle on Federal land or water that is made available for hunting or fishing activities or to issue regulations relating to the level of lead in ammunition or tackle to be used on Federal land or water, unless— (1) the Secretary of the Interior determines that a decline in wildlife population on the specific unit of Federal land or water is primarily caused by the use of lead in ammunition or tackle, based on field data from the specific unit of Federal land or water

24. Block on lesser prairie-chicken protections

    This section stops any federal money from being used to carry out a 2022 rule that listed the lesser prairie-chicken under the Endangered Species Act. That rule gave the northern group 'threatened' status and the southern group 'endangered' status. With no funding allowed, federal agencies cannot enforce protections or restrictions tied to that rule. This applies to money from this bill and from any other federal law.

    Who this affects

    Landowners, farmers, ranchers, and energy developers in the Great Plains and Southwest who operate in lesser prairie-chicken habitat. Federal wildlife agencies that would otherwise enforce the 2022 listing rule are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking the rule removes land-use restrictions that could limit farming, grazing, and energy development, but it also removes federal protections for a bird population that wildlife officials said was at risk of decline.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce the final rule titled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Lesser Prairie-Chicken; Threatened Status With Section 4(d) Rule for the Northern Distinct Population Segment and Endangered Status for the Southern Distinct Population Segment" (87 Fed. Reg. 72674 (November 25, 2022)).

25. Block on Northern Long-Eared Bat endangered species rule

    This section stops any federal money from being used to carry out a 2022 rule that listed the northern long-eared bat as endangered. The rule was published in November 2022 and gave the bat the highest level of protection under the Endangered Species Act. Because no funds can be used to implement or enforce it, federal agencies could not use this law or any other to act on that rule.

    Who this affects

    Landowners, loggers, energy developers, and others whose projects could be restricted by the bat's endangered status. It also affects wildlife managers who would otherwise enforce the rule.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking the rule removes regulatory burdens on industries working in the bat's habitat, but it also removes federal protections for a species that was listed as endangered due to population decline.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce the final rule titled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status for Northern Long-Eared Bat" (87 Fed. Reg. 73488 (November 30, 2022)).

26. Gray wolf delisting from endangered species list

    This section requires the Secretary of the Interior to reissue a 2020 rule within 60 days. That 2020 rule removed the gray wolf from the federal list of endangered and threatened wildlife. Once the rule is reissued, no court can review or challenge it. The rule was originally published on November 3, 2020, but faced legal challenges. This section bypasses that court process.

    Who this affects

    Gray wolf populations across the United States would lose federal endangered species protections. Ranchers, hunters, wildlife managers, and conservation groups would all be affected by changes to wolf management.

    Tradeoff

    Removing federal protections may give states more flexibility to manage wolf populations, but it also removes a legal pathway for groups who want to keep those protections in place.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary of the Interior shall reissue the final rule titled Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removing the Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (85 Fed. Reg. 69778 (November 3, 2020))... shall not be subject to judicial review.

27. Block on wolverine threatened species rule

    This section stops any federal money from being used to carry out a 2023 rule that gave the North American wolverine "threatened" status under the Endangered Species Act. The rule was published on November 30, 2023. It also included a Section 4(d) rule, which sets limits on activities that can harm the species. Because no funds can be used to run the rule, federal agencies could not enforce its protections or restrictions while this ban is in effect.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies that enforce wildlife protections, such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It also affects landowners, industries, and others in wolverine habitat who would have faced restrictions under the rule.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking the rule removes federal restrictions on activities in wolverine habitat, but it also removes the legal protections meant to help the species survive.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce the final rule titled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Threatened Species Status With Section 4(d) Rule for North American Wolverine" (88 Fed. Reg. 83726 (November 30, 2023)).

28. Block on grizzly bear reintroduction in Washington State

    This section stops any federal money from being used to carry out a 2024 rule. That rule would have brought grizzly bears back to the North Cascades area of Washington State. The bears would have been listed as a 'nonessential experimental population,' a legal status that gives managers more flexibility in how they handle the animals. The funding ban applies to this bill and any other federal spending law. In practice, the reintroduction program cannot move forward as long as this restriction is in place.

    Who this affects

    Federal wildlife managers at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service who would run the program. Also affected are landowners, ranchers, tribes, and outdoor users in the North Cascades region of Washington State.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking the rule prevents costs and risks that some landowners and ranchers associate with grizzly bears, but it also halts a federal effort to restore grizzly bears to habitat where they once lived.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce the final rule titled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Establishment of a Nonessential Experimental Population of Grizzly Bear in the North Cascades Ecosystem, Washington State" (89 Fed. Reg. 36982 (May 3, 2024)).

29. Block on grizzly bear reintroduction in Bitterroot region

    This section stops federal money from being used to bring grizzly bears back to the Bitterroot Ecosystem. The Bitterroot Ecosystem covers parts of Montana and Idaho. The ban applies to funds from this bill and any other federal law. The Secretary of the Interior could not use the Endangered Species Act to create an 'experimental population' of grizzly bears there. An experimental population is a group of animals moved to a new area to help recover a threatened species.

    Who this affects

    Residents, landowners, and wildlife managers in the Bitterroot region of Montana and Idaho. It also affects federal wildlife officials and conservation groups working on grizzly bear recovery.

    Tradeoff

    The restriction prevents potential conflicts between grizzly bears and people or livestock in the region, but it also stops a recovery effort that supporters say could help restore a threatened species.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973 ( 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ) to establish an experimental population of the grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) within the Bitterroot Ecosystem of Montana and Idaho.

30. Captive fish exemption from Endangered Species Act rules

    This section blocks federal money from being used to apply Endangered Species Act rules to fish kept in captivity. The fish must be legally held and kept physically separate from wild fish of the same species. If those two conditions are met, the Interior Department cannot use any funds to enforce or carry out any proposed or final rule against those captive fish. This applies to money from this bill and from any other federal law.

    Who this affects

    Fish farmers, hatchery operators, aquaculture businesses, and anyone else legally holding fish in captivity. It also affects wildlife managers who enforce endangered species protections.

    Tradeoff

    Captive fish operations gain protection from federal endangered species rules, but critics may argue this could reduce oversight of captive fish that might interact with or impact wild endangered populations.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used by the Secretary of the Interior pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973 ( 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq. ) to implement, administer, or enforce a proposed or final rule with regard to a fish legally held in captivity or in a controlled environment in a manner that maintains physical separation of such fish from any wild population of the same species.

31. Ban on bison introduction at Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge

    This section blocks any federal money from being used to bring American bison onto the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge in Montana. The ban applies to funds from this bill and from any other federal law. The Secretary of the Interior cannot take steps to introduce or allow bison onto that refuge as long as this restriction is in place.

    Who this affects

    The Secretary of the Interior and federal wildlife managers who oversee the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge. It also affects anyone seeking to restore bison to that land.

    Tradeoff

    The restriction prevents bison from being placed on the refuge, which satisfies concerns from nearby ranchers about bison roaming onto private land, but it also blocks wildlife managers from pursuing bison restoration on that federal land.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used by the Secretary of the Interior to facilitate or allow for the introduction of American bison ( Bison bison ) on the Charles M. Russell National Wildlife Refuge

32. Block on three endangered species rules from 2024

    This section stops any money in the bill from being used to carry out three rules published in April 2024. All three rules updated how the Endangered Species Act works. The first rule changed general regulations for protecting listed species. The second rule changed how species are added to the endangered or threatened list and how critical habitat is set. The third rule changed how federal agencies must work together to avoid harming listed species. By cutting off funding, this section prevents these updated rules from taking effect or being enforced.

    Who this affects

    Federal wildlife agencies, such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, cannot use this bill's funds to enforce the three rules. Landowners, developers, and industries subject to Endangered Species Act reviews may also be affected.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking the rules may reduce regulatory requirements on land and resource use, but it also means the updated species protections and habitat rules do not apply.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce— (1) the final rule titled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Regulations Pertaining to Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants" (89 Fed. Reg. 23919 (April 5, 2024))

33. Restore Interior Department transparency rules for legal settlements

    This section requires the Secretary of the Interior to bring back an internal policy called Order 3368 within 60 days. That 2018 order set rules for how the Department handles consent decrees and settlement agreements. These are legal deals made in court or with outside parties. The order was meant to make those deals more open and accountable. A later order from 2022 canceled the 2018 rules. This section blocks any money in the bill from being used to cancel Order 3368 again, enforce the 2022 cancellation order, or create any similar cancellation order.

    Who this affects

    The Department of the Interior and any outside groups, including environmental or advocacy organizations, that enter into legal settlements or consent decrees with the Department.

    Tradeoff

    Bringing back the 2018 order may increase oversight of settlement deals, but could also limit the Department's flexibility to resolve lawsuits quickly.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary of the Interior shall reissue and implement Order No. 3368 Promoting Transparency and Accountability in Consent Decrees and Settlement Agreements dated September 11, 2018.

34. Block on BLM Conservation and Landscape Health rule

    This section stops any money in this bill from being used to carry out or enforce a Bureau of Land Management rule called 'Conservation and Landscape Health.' That rule was published on May 9, 2024. The Bureau manages millions of acres of federal public land. The 2024 rule set new standards for how that land is managed, including giving conservation more weight alongside uses like grazing and mining. This section would defund enforcement of those standards for the duration of this appropriations act.

    Who this affects

    The Bureau of Land Management and anyone who uses or depends on federal public lands, including ranchers, miners, conservationists, and recreation users.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking the rule frees land users from new conservation requirements, but it also removes protections that supporters say guard against land degradation.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this Act may be obligated or expended to implement or enforce the final rule from the Bureau of Land Management entitled "Conservation and Landscape Health" and published in the Federal Register on May 9, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 40308).

35. Grand Staircase-Escalante Monument management rules

    This section says that no federal money can be spent to manage Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah unless the management follows one specific plan. That plan is the Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plans from February 2020. Any other approach to managing the monument would be off-limits under this rule. The 2020 plan was written after the monument's boundaries were reduced in 2017. It allows more uses, such as grazing and energy development, than earlier plans did.

    Who this affects

    Federal land managers at the Bureau of Land Management who oversee the monument. It also affects visitors, ranchers, energy companies, and conservation groups with interests in the monument.

    Tradeoff

    Locking in the 2020 plan keeps management stable for users who benefit from it, but it prevents managers from using plans that protect more land or that reflect any future boundary or policy changes.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used for management of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument except in compliance with the document titled Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plans for the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument (February 2020).

36. Deadline to finalize endangered species cooperation rule

    This section tells the Secretary of the Interior to publish a specific rule within 60 days of this law passing. The rule is about how federal agencies must work together when their actions might affect endangered or threatened species. The rule was originally proposed in January 2021 but was never made final. This section sets a firm deadline to complete that process.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies whose projects or decisions touch habitat or species protected under the Endangered Species Act. It also affects landowners, developers, and others who need permits reviewed by those agencies.

    Tradeoff

    Finalizing the rule gives agencies and stakeholders clearer, faster guidance, but it limits further public input or revision to a rule that was drafted several years ago.

    Show the exact bill text

    Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall issue the final rule titled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Regulations for Interagency Cooperation" (86 Fed. Reg. 2373 (January 12, 2021)).

37. Ban on National Park Service housing for people without legal immigration status

    This section blocks the National Park Service from using any money in this bill to provide housing to people who are in the country without legal immigration status. The term 'alien without lawful status' is defined by the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Park Service sometimes provides housing to seasonal or full-time workers. This rule would apply to that housing and any other housing the agency might offer.

    Who this affects

    People without legal immigration status who might otherwise receive housing from the National Park Service. It also affects the Park Service itself, which must screen for immigration status before providing housing.

    Tradeoff

    The section limits who can receive government-funded housing, which may reduce costs or address legal concerns, but it could also make it harder for the Park Service to house workers in remote areas where housing options are scarce.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the National Park Service to provide housing to an alien without lawful status under the immigration laws

38. Environmental review required before oil and gas drilling in Big Cypress National Preserve

    This section requires the National Park Service to complete a full environmental impact study before approving any permit for non-federal oil or gas operations inside Big Cypress National Preserve in Florida. An environmental impact statement is a detailed federal review under the National Environmental Policy Act. It looks at how a proposed action could harm the environment. The study must be done before the permit is approved, not after. This adds a required step to the permit process for private or state oil and gas operators who want to work inside the preserve.

    Who this affects

    Private and state oil or gas companies seeking to operate inside Big Cypress National Preserve. The National Park Service must carry out the study before granting permits.

    Tradeoff

    The requirement gives more environmental protection to the preserve, but it adds time and cost to the permit process for oil and gas operators.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National Park Service, shall prepare an environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 ( 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. ), prior to approving an operations permit

39. Protecting 2020 offshore drilling withdrawal

    This section states that nothing in this spending bill changes or overrides a 2020 presidential memo. That memo withdrew certain areas of the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf from oil and gas leasing. Those areas stay off-limits for leasing under this law. The withdrawal remains in effect exactly as it was set in 2020.

    Who this affects

    Energy companies seeking offshore drilling leases and coastal communities near the withdrawn areas.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping the withdrawal protects those offshore areas from new drilling activity, but it also keeps potential energy resources unavailable for leasing.

    Show the exact bill text

    Nothing in this Act shall affect the Presidential memorandum titled Memorandum on Withdrawal of Certain Areas of the United States Outer Continental Shelf From Leasing Disposition and dated September 8, 2020.

40. Block on changes to the Ten-Day Notice rule

    This section stops the Secretary of the Interior from spending any federal money to carry out, enforce, or finalize changes to the Ten-Day Notice rule. The changes in question were announced on April 9, 2024. The section also blocks any future changes to that rule. The Ten-Day Notice rule requires advance notice before certain actions, such as water releases from dams, that affect river users like rafters and fishers.

    Who this affects

    The Secretary of the Interior and federal agencies under that department are directly affected. River users, dam operators, and others who rely on advance notice of water releases may also be affected.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking the rule changes keeps the existing notice requirements in place, which may protect river users from surprise water releases, but it also prevents the agency from updating the rule if officials believe changes would improve safety or operations.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used by the Secretary of the Interior to implement, enforce, or finalize the changes announced on April 9, 2024, to the Ten-Day Notice rule or to make any further changes to the Ten-Day Notice rule.

41. Block on Alaska petroleum reserve rule

    This section stops federal money from being used to carry out a Bureau of Land Management rule from May 2024. That rule set new guidelines for managing and protecting the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. The section also blocks any future rule that is similar to or replaces that 2024 rule. No agency can use funds from this bill or any other law to put the rule into effect.

    Who this affects

    The Bureau of Land Management and other federal agencies that manage the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska. It also affects oil and gas companies, Alaska Native communities, and conservation groups with interests in that area.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking the rule could make it easier to develop oil and gas in the reserve, but it also removes protections that were meant to guard wildlife and subsistence resources in the area.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce the final rule titled "Management and Protection of the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska" published by the Bureau of Land Management and dated May 7, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 38712), or any successor or substantially similar rule.

42. Grizzly bear delisting in Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

    This section tells the Secretary of the Interior to reissue a 2017 rule within 180 days. That 2017 rule removed grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem from the federal endangered and threatened species list. The section also blocks any court from reviewing either the reissued rule or this section of the law. This means the delisting cannot be challenged in court the way a normal agency rule could be.

    Who this affects

    Grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem area (parts of Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho) and the people, states, and tribes who live or hunt there. Federal wildlife managers and conservationists are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Delisting could allow more local management and hunting of grizzly bears, but it removes federal protections and the ability for anyone to challenge that decision in court.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary of the Interior shall reissue the final rule titled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removing the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem Population of Grizzly Bears From the Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife" (82 Fed. Reg. 30502 (June 30, 2017)). (b) The reissuance of the final rule described in subsection (a) (including this section) shall not be subject to judicial review.

43. Block on Big Cypress wilderness designation

    This section bars the National Park Service from spending any federal money to label Big Cypress National Preserve in Florida as wilderness. It also bars managing that preserve under the National Wilderness Preservation System. The ban applies to funds from this bill and from any other federal law. It stays in effect as long as the restriction appears in law.

    Who this affects

    The National Park Service cannot act on a wilderness designation for Big Cypress. Visitors, nearby landowners, off-road vehicle users, and hunters who currently use the preserve could be affected by whether wilderness rules ever apply there.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping the designation off the table preserves current access and uses at the preserve, but it also prevents the stronger land protections that wilderness status would provide.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used by the National Park Service to designate or manage Big Cypress National Preserve as wilderness or as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System.

44. Longer probation period for seasonal National Park Service workers

    This section changes the probationary period for certain National Park Service seasonal employees. Right now, a regulation sets that period at 6 months (1,040 hours). This section replaces those numbers with 9 months (1,560 hours). That means a seasonal park employee must work longer before completing their probationary status.

    Who this affects

    Seasonal National Park Service employees who are subject to probationary work-hour requirements under federal personnel rules.

    Tradeoff

    A longer probationary period gives managers more time to evaluate seasonal workers, but it also means employees wait longer before gaining the protections that come after probation ends.

    Show the exact bill text

    by substituting "9 months (1,560 hours)" for "6 months (1,040 hours)"

45. Mineral leasing revenue sharing deadline extended one year

    This section changes a date in an existing law called the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920. The law controls how money from oil, gas, and mineral leases on federal land is shared with states. Every place the year '2026' appears in a specific part of that law, this section replaces it with '2027'. This pushes a deadline or expiration date forward by one year.

    Who this affects

    States that receive shared revenue from federal mineral leases on their land. Federal agencies that manage those payments are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Extending the date keeps the current payment rules in place for one more year, but it also delays any changes that might have happened when the old deadline expired.

    Show the exact bill text

    striking 2026 each place it appears and inserting 2027

46. Closing the Navajo-Hopi relocation office and shifting its duties

    This section sets a firm end date for the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation (ONHIR). Right now, that office closes only when the President says its work is done. This section changes the law so ONHIR closes on September 30, 2026, no matter what. After it closes, the Secretary of the Interior takes over any unfinished work. That includes pending relocation applications and appeals, support services for people who were relocated, repairs and warranties on relocation homes, and managing ONHIR's records. The change takes effect as soon as the bill becomes law.

    Who this affects

    Navajo and Hopi tribal members who have open relocation cases, pending appeals, or homes covered by ONHIR warranties. It also affects the staff and operations of ONHIR and the Department of the Interior.

    Tradeoff

    Setting a hard closing date gives a clear end to the office, but it moves unfinished cases to the Interior Department, which may or may not have the same resources or expertise to handle them.

    Show the exact bill text

    Upon termination, the Secretary shall assume any remaining functions or responsibilities of the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation (ONHIR) authorized by the Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act of 1974, including functions or responsibilities of ONHIR relating to certified relocation applications and appeals pending as of the date of the enactment of this Act, beneficiary support services, warranty and repair obligations for relocation homes, and records management.

47. Reinstate Northern Spotted Owl critical habitat rule

    This section orders the Secretary of the Interior to reissue a specific rule within 60 days. That rule was first published on January 15, 2021. It set the official boundaries of critical habitat for the Northern Spotted Owl. Critical habitat is land that a protected species needs to survive and recover. Reissuing the rule restores those habitat boundaries, which guide land-use decisions in the areas involved.

    Who this affects

    Federal land managers, timber companies, loggers, and landowners in the Pacific Northwest are affected. The Northern Spotted Owl, which is listed as threatened, is also directly affected.

    Tradeoff

    Restoring the critical habitat boundaries gives the owl more legal protection, but it can also limit logging and other land uses in the designated areas.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary of the Interior shall reissue the final rule entitled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for the Northern Spotted Owl" and published in the Federal Register on January 15, 2021 (86 Fed. Reg. 4820).

48. Block on Canada Lynx critical habitat rule

    This section stops any federal money from being used to carry out a specific rule about the Canada lynx. The rule was proposed on November 29, 2024. It would have changed which land areas count as critical habitat for the Canada lynx in the contiguous United States. Critical habitat designations can limit certain activities on that land. This section applies to money from this bill and any other federal funding law.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies responsible for wildlife rules, landowners and businesses in areas that could be designated as critical habitat, and conservation groups focused on the Canada lynx.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking the rule prevents new land-use restrictions that could affect property owners and industries, but it also stops added habitat protections that supporters say the Canada lynx needs.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce the proposed rule titled Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for the Contiguous U.S. Distinct Population Segment of the Canada Lynx (89 Fed. Reg. 94656 (November 29, 2024)).

49. Local residents hired directly at national park field units

    This section lets the Secretary of the Interior hire local residents directly into federal jobs without going through the normal competitive hiring process. To qualify, a person must live permanently near a national park or other field unit. The jobs covered are at pay grade GS-9 or below for salaried workers, or WG-15 or below for wage-grade workers. The hiring must still follow basic merit principles and public notice rules. These hires are treated as fully compliant with federal civil service hiring law.

    Who this affects

    People who live permanently near a federal Interior Department field unit, such as a national park or refuge. It also affects other job applicants who would otherwise compete for the same positions.

    Tradeoff

    Local residents gain a faster path to federal jobs, but other applicants across the country have less access to those same openings.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Secretary of the Interior may recruit and directly appoint qualified individuals into the competitive service who are certified as maintaining a permanent and exclusive residence in the vicinity of a field unit, into any position at or below grades GS–9 or WG–15 or equivalent within such field unit

50. Grizzly bear delisting in Northern Continental Divide

    This section orders the Secretary of the Interior to remove the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem grizzly bear population from the federal endangered and threatened species list. The rule must be issued within 180 days of the law passing. The Secretary must do this regardless of other laws that normally govern how such rules are made. No court may review or challenge the rule or this section.

    Who this affects

    The grizzly bear population in the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (parts of Montana and nearby states) is directly affected. Ranchers, hunters, wildlife managers, tribes, and conservation groups in that region are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Delisting removes federal protections for the bears and gives states more control over management, but it bypasses the normal scientific review process and blocks any court challenges.

    Show the exact bill text

    The issuance of the final rule described in subsection (a) (including this section) shall not be subject to judicial review.

51. Ban on using funds to influence pending legislation

    This section says that no money from this law can be used to promote public support for or opposition to any bill that Congress has not yet finished acting on. Agencies cannot publish or hand out materials meant to sway the public on pending legislation. The only exception is direct communication with members of Congress, which federal law already allows under 18 U.S.C. 1913.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies and employees funded by this law. It limits how they can use public funds when Congress is still debating a bill.

    Tradeoff

    This restriction keeps agencies from using taxpayer money to lobby the public, but it also limits how agencies can share information about proposed laws that may affect their work.

    Show the exact bill text

    No part of any appropriation contained in this Act shall be available for any activity or the publication or distribution of literature that in any way tends to promote public support or opposition to any legislative proposal on which Congressional action is not complete

52. Funds must be used within the current year

    This section sets a general rule for all money in this bill. Funds must be spent or committed during the current fiscal year. They cannot be carried over into a future year. The only exception is if another part of this bill specifically says a fund can last longer.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies that receive money through this bill. Any agency that has not used its funds by the end of the fiscal year loses access to that money.

    Tradeoff

    This rule keeps spending within a single budget year, which limits flexibility for agencies that need more time to plan or complete projects.

    Show the exact bill text

    No part of any appropriation contained in this Act shall remain available for obligation beyond the current fiscal year unless expressly so provided herein.

53. Overhead charge reporting and approval

    This section requires federal agencies to show their math when charging overhead costs to programs and projects. Overhead costs include things like working capital fund charges and money held back for headquarters or central office operations. Agencies must list these charges in their annual budget documents. The relevant House and Senate Appropriations Committees must approve those charges. If the estimated charges change, agencies must go back to those committees for approval of the changes.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies and bureaus under the Interior and Environment spending bill. Programs and projects that have overhead costs deducted from their budgets are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Congress gains more oversight over how agencies allocate overhead costs, but agencies must spend extra time preparing and submitting detailed justifications for committee review.

    Show the exact bill text

    The amount and basis of estimated overhead charges, deductions, reserves, or holdbacks, including working capital fund charges, from programs, projects, activities and subactivities to support government-wide, departmental, agency, or bureau administrative functions or headquarters, regional, or central operations shall be presented in annual budget justifications and subject to approval by the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate.

54. Ban on new mining patent applications

    This section blocks federal money from being used to accept or process new patent applications for mining or mill site claims. A patent here means a deed giving a miner permanent ownership of public land. The ban has one exception: applications filed on or before September 30, 1994, that also met all legal requirements by that date can still move forward. For those older applications, an applicant can pay for a third-party contractor to do a required mineral examination. The government agency, the Bureau of Land Management, picks and pays that contractor, even though the applicant funds it. The Interior Secretary must also send Congress a report by September 30, 2028, on steps taken under an older 1997 cleanup plan.

    Who this affects

    Mining companies and individual miners who want to gain permanent ownership of public land through a patent. Only those who filed applications before October 1994 and met all requirements by then can still pursue a patent.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking new patents keeps more public land from passing permanently into private hands, but it also limits the ability of miners to secure full ownership of claims they work.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or expended to accept or process applications for a patent for any mining or mill site claim located under the general mining laws.

55. Continuation of prior law provisions into 2027

    This section keeps two older rules in place for 2027. Those rules were first written in a 2015 spending law called Public Law 113-235. Without this section, those rules would expire. By including this line, Congress makes them active for the 2027 budget year. The exact content of the two rules is found in sections 405 and 406 of that 2015 law.

    Who this affects

    Anyone or any program covered by the original 2015 rules in sections 405 and 406 of Public Law 113-235.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping older rules in place avoids a gap in policy, but it also means Congress does not revisit or update those rules for current conditions.

    Show the exact bill text

    Sections 405 and 406 of division F of the Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (Public Law 113–235) shall continue in effect in fiscal year 2027.

56. Limits on contract support cost funding for tribal programs

    This section sets a spending boundary for a specific type of cost. When tribes run their own federal programs under self-determination or self-governance agreements, the federal government owes them "contract support costs" to cover overhead and administration. This section says that only the money listed in this bill for 2027 can be used to pay those costs. No other funds can be tapped. It also blocks those 2027 funds from being used to pay older, unpaid contract support cost claims from past years. It blocks them from paying back settlements or court judgments tied to past-year contract support costs as well.

    Who this affects

    Federally recognized tribes that manage their own Bureau of Indian Affairs, Bureau of Indian Education, or Indian Health Service programs through self-determination or self-governance contracts. Tribes with unresolved past-year contract support cost claims are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Capping the funds gives Congress a fixed cost ceiling for 2027, but tribes with outstanding claims from past years cannot use this funding to recover those owed amounts.

    Show the exact bill text

    such amounts provided by this Act are not available for payment of claims for contract support costs for prior years, or for repayments of payments for settlements or judgments awarding contract support costs for prior years.

57. Forest management plan revision deadline relief

    Federal law normally requires the U.S. Forest Service to update land management plans for national forests at least every 15 years. This section says the Secretary of Agriculture will not be treated as breaking that rule just because 15 years have passed without a revision. All other requirements of the forest planning law still apply. However, there is a condition: if the Secretary is not working in good faith and with reasonable speed to finish a revision, using the money available, this protection goes away for that forest unit. A court can then order the plan to be completed on a faster schedule.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Forest Service and the national forests that have outdated land management plans. It also affects communities, timber industries, conservation groups, and others who rely on those plans.

    Tradeoff

    The Forest Service gets legal protection from overdue-plan lawsuits, but loses that protection and faces court-ordered deadlines if it is not making a genuine, timely effort to update the plans.

    Show the exact bill text

    if the Secretary is not acting expeditiously and in good faith, within the funding available, to revise a plan for a unit of the National Forest System, this section shall be void with respect to such plan and a court of proper jurisdiction may order completion of the plan on an accelerated basis.

58. No oil and gas leasing inside national monuments

    This section blocks the use of any money from this bill to start or carry out oil, gas, or mineral leasing inside National Monuments. The protection applies to the monument boundaries as they existed on January 20, 2001. This covers monuments on both land and on the outer continental shelf (the seabed beyond state waters). There is one exception: if the original presidential proclamation that created a specific monument already allowed such leasing activities, those can still happen.

    Who this affects

    Energy companies seeking to lease federal monument lands for oil, gas, or minerals. Also affects federal agencies that manage those lands.

    Tradeoff

    Protecting monument lands from energy leasing preserves those areas from development, but it also limits potential domestic energy production on federal land.

    Show the exact bill text

    No funds provided in this Act may be expended to conduct preleasing, leasing and related activities under either the Mineral Leasing Act...within the boundaries of a National Monument...as such boundary existed on January 20, 2001, except where such activities are allowed under the Presidential proclamation establishing such monument.

59. Congressional approval required for land condemnation filings

    This section limits how the government can use land-purchase money. Normally, the federal government can file legal papers to take private land through eminent domain. Under this rule, agencies must first get approval from the House and Senate Appropriations Committees before filing those papers. There is one exception: funds set aside for Everglades National Park and Florida state land purchases for Everglades restoration do not need that extra approval step.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies that want to acquire land using eminent domain are affected. Private landowners whose land may be targeted are also affected, since the extra step adds a layer of oversight before legal action begins.

    Tradeoff

    The rule adds a congressional check on land takings, which can slow acquisitions but gives lawmakers more control over how condemnation funds are used.

    Show the exact bill text

    no funds appropriated in this Act for the acquisition of lands or interests in lands may be expended for the filing of declarations of taking or complaints in condemnation without the approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations

60. Federal contracting rules requirement

    This section says that executive branch agencies cannot use funds from this law to sign contracts unless they follow standard federal contracting rules. Those rules come from two federal statutes and the Federal Acquisition Regulation. There are three exceptions. First, a contract is allowed if another federal law specifically permits skipping those rules, such as formula grants to states or tribes. Second, contracts made under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act are allowed. Third, contracts already signed before this law took effect are allowed.

    Who this affects

    Executive branch agencies that spend money under this law. State and tribal grant recipients are largely exempt from the rule.

    Tradeoff

    Requiring standard contracting rules adds oversight and consistency, but it can slow down or add paperwork to the contracting process for agencies.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act to executive branch agencies may be used to enter into any Federal contract unless such contract is entered into in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 33 of title 41, United States Code, or Chapter 137 of title 10, United States Code, and the Federal Acquisition Regulation

61. Public posting of agency reports

    This section says that federal agencies funded by this bill must post required congressional reports on their public websites. The agency head decides if posting serves the national interest. There are two exceptions: reports that could harm national security, and reports with proprietary (private business) information. Before posting, the agency must wait at least 45 days after giving the report to the relevant congressional committee.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies funded by this bill and members of the public who want to read government reports. Congressional committees also have a role, since they receive reports first.

    Tradeoff

    More public access to government reports increases transparency, but agency heads keep broad discretion to decide what gets posted, and some reports may never be posted due to the security or proprietary exceptions.

    Show the exact bill text

    Any agency receiving funds made available in this Act, shall, subject to subsections (b) and (c), post on the public website of that agency any report required to be submitted by the Congress in this or any other Act, upon the determination by the head of the agency that it shall serve the national interest.

62. Limits on National Endowment for the Arts grants

    This section sets three rules for how the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) can give out grants. First, the NEA can only give grants directly to individual people for three specific fellowships: literature, National Heritage, or American Jazz Masters. Second, grant money cannot be passed along to other groups or people, unless the original grant went to a state, local arts agency, or regional group. Payments for goods and services are still allowed. Third, grants cannot fund a group's whole season of events unless the application names the specific programs or projects in that season.

    Who this affects

    Artists, arts organizations, and fellowship applicants who receive or seek NEA funding. State and local arts agencies are treated differently and have more flexibility under these rules.

    Tradeoff

    These rules give Congress tighter control over how NEA money is used, but they also limit how freely arts groups and individuals can structure their work and pass funding along.

    Show the exact bill text

    The Chairperson shall only award a grant to an individual if such grant is awarded to such individual for a literature fellowship, National Heritage Fellowship, or American Jazz Masters Fellowship.

63. National Endowment for the Arts grant priorities and limits

    This section tells the head of the National Endowment for the Arts how to hand out grants and services. First, priority must go to projects that serve underserved populations, meaning groups with low incomes or geographic isolation. Second, priority must also go to projects that build public knowledge and appreciation of the arts. Third, a special grant category must be created for projects with national reach or multi-state tours. No single state can receive more than 15 percent of total grant funds, not counting those national-reach grants. The agency head must report to Congress each year, listing grants by state and category. Grants that support community music performance and education must also be encouraged.

    Who this affects

    Artists, arts organizations, and community groups that apply for federal arts grants. Low-income and geographically isolated communities are given extra priority.

    Tradeoff

    Focusing funds on underserved communities and capping any one state at 15 percent may limit grant amounts available to larger states or well-established arts organizations.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Chairperson shall not make grants exceeding 15 percent, in the aggregate, of such funds to any single State, excluding grants made under the authority of paragraph (1)

64. Quarterly spending balance reports for four agencies

    This section requires four federal agencies to report their money balances to Congress every quarter. The four agencies are the Department of the Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Forest Service, and the Indian Health Service. Each report must show all uncommitted, committed, and unobligated funds for every program and activity. The agencies must start sending these reports within 60 days after this bill becomes law.

    Who this affects

    The four named federal agencies must prepare and submit the reports. Congressional appropriations committees receive the reports.

    Tradeoff

    Congress gains more frequent visibility into how agencies hold and use their funds, but the agencies must spend staff time and resources preparing detailed quarterly reports.

    Show the exact bill text

    shall provide the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and Senate quarterly reports on the status of balances of appropriations including all uncommitted, committed, and unobligated funds in each program and activity within 60 days of enactment of this Act.

65. Forest Service grazing permits kept in force

    This section keeps a set of rules in place for one more year. Those rules come from a 2003 law (Public Law 108-108, Section 325). They cover grazing permits issued by the U.S. Forest Service. Specifically, they apply to Forest Service lands that are not managed under a separate federal grazing law (the Federal Land Policy and Management Act). By renewing these terms for fiscal year 2027, the bill continues existing permit conditions without change.

    Who this affects

    Ranchers and livestock operators who hold Forest Service grazing permits on lands not covered by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. It also affects Forest Service staff who manage those permits.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping the existing rules gives permit holders stability, but it also delays any updates or reforms to those grazing permit terms for another year.

    Show the exact bill text

    The terms and conditions of section 325 of Public Law 108–108 (117 Stat. 1307), regarding grazing permits issued by the Forest Service on any lands not subject to administration under section 402 of the Federal Lands Policy and Management Act ( 43 U.S.C. 1752 ), shall remain in effect for fiscal year 2027.

66. Block pornography websites on government computer networks

    This section says no money from this bill can be used to run a government computer network unless that network is built to block pornography websites. There is one exception. Law enforcement agencies and similar groups doing criminal investigations or prosecutions can still use funds even if their networks access such sites.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies funded by this bill must block pornography on their networks. Law enforcement agencies doing criminal work are exempt.

    Tradeoff

    The rule adds a content-filtering requirement to government networks, which may increase security costs, but it exempts law enforcement that may need access for investigations.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available in this Act may be used to maintain or establish a computer network unless such network is designed to block access to pornography websites.

67. Transfer of excess wild horses and burros to government agencies

    This section lets the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service give extra wild horses and burros to other federal, state, or local agencies to use as work animals. The transfer can happen quickly when an agency asks for it. Once transferred, the animals lose their protected status under the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act. Agencies that receive these animals cannot slaughter them for commercial products and cannot sell them to be slaughtered either. They can only put an animal down if a licensed vet says it is severely injured, sick, or very old. The section also blocks federal money in this bill from being used to destroy healthy, unadopted wild horses or burros, or to sell them for slaughter.

    Who this affects

    Wild horses and burros held by federal land agencies. Federal, state, and local government agencies that could receive these animals.

    Tradeoff

    Agencies gain a fast way to place excess wild animals as work animals without costly holding, but the animals lose federal protections once transferred.

    Show the exact bill text

    An excess wild horse or burro transferred under subsection (a) shall lose status as a wild free-roaming horse or burro (as defined in section 2 of Public Law 92–195).

68. Extension of Forest Service timber contracting authority

    This section extends a Forest Service contracting rule. The original rule was set to expire on September 30, 2019. This bill changes that date to September 30, 2027. The rule comes from a 2005 law (Public Law 109-54) and covers how the Forest Service can handle certain timber sale contracts. By updating the date, the Forest Service can keep using that contracting authority for several more years.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Forest Service and companies or individuals who hold timber sale contracts with the agency.

    Tradeoff

    Extending the authority lets the Forest Service keep using existing contract rules, but it also delays any update or review of those rules until at least 2027.

    Show the exact bill text

    Section 503(f) of Public Law 109–54 ( 16 U.S.C. 580d note) shall be applied by substituting September 30, 2027 for September 30, 2019 .

69. Buy American rule for water system construction

    This section requires that iron and steel products used in water system construction projects be made in the United States. This applies when projects are funded through state revolving loan programs for drinking water and clean water. Covered products include pipes, valves, hydrants, tanks, manhole covers, and structural steel. There are three exceptions: the EPA can waive the rule if following it would hurt the public interest, if U.S.-made products are not available in enough quantity or quality, or if using U.S. products would raise the total project cost by more than 25 percent. Anyone can request a waiver. The EPA must post waiver requests online and allow at least 15 days of public comment before deciding. The EPA may also keep up to 0.25 percent of revolving fund money to manage and oversee this rule.

    Who this affects

    Water utilities, contractors, and local governments that receive federal revolving fund money for water system projects. Iron and steel manufacturers are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    The rule supports U.S. manufacturers but may raise project costs or slow construction if American-made materials are harder to find.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by a State water pollution control revolving fund...shall be used for a project for the construction, alteration, maintenance, or repair of a public water system or treatment works unless all of the iron and steel products used in the project are produced in the United States.

70. Wildland fire training and equipment sharing with local fire groups

    This section lets the Secretary of the Interior make grants and cooperative agreements with volunteer fire departments, rural fire departments, rangeland fire protection groups, and similar organizations. The money and agreements can pay for wildland fire training, equipment, supplies, and communication devices. The section also lets the Secretary transfer ownership of surplus firefighting equipment from the Interior Department to these groups. This transfer can happen even if two federal property laws would normally block it.

    Who this affects

    Volunteer fire departments, rural fire departments, rangeland fire protection groups, and similar local fire organizations. The Interior Department is also affected because it gains a new way to dispose of surplus equipment.

    Tradeoff

    Local fire groups get free training, gear, and surplus equipment, but federal surplus property rules are bypassed to make those transfers possible.

    Show the exact bill text

    the Secretary is further authorized to transfer title to excess Department of the Interior firefighting equipment no longer needed to carry out the functions of the Department's wildland fire management program to such organizations.

71. Congressional approval required before moving funds

    This section says that no money from this law can be moved from one purpose to another without first getting approval from both the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. This applies to money from this law and from prior years' laws. The process for asking permission is spelled out in the report that goes along with this law. Agencies cannot shift funds on their own without that advance sign-off.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies that receive funding through this law. Agency budget officers must follow this rule before moving any money to a different use.

    Tradeoff

    Congress keeps tighter control over how money is spent, but agencies lose flexibility to respond quickly to changing needs without seeking committee approval first.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available in this Act, in this and prior fiscal years, may be reprogrammed without the advance approval of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations in accordance with the reprogramming procedures contained in the report accompanying this Act.

72. Update to a prior-year spending rule

    This section updates an older budget rule. It takes a rule from a 2011 law (Public Law 112-74, Section 412) and replaces the year 2019 with the year 2027. This means that rule, which was written to apply in fiscal year 2019, now applies in fiscal year 2027 instead. The section does not change the rule itself, only the year it covers.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies and programs covered by the original 2011 rule. The exact group depends on what that rule requires.

    Tradeoff

    Reusing an older rule saves time writing new law, but it may not fit current conditions as well as a newly written rule would.

    Show the exact bill text

    Section 412 of division E of Public Law 112–74 shall be applied by substituting fiscal year 2027 for fiscal year 2019 .

73. Extension of forest service authority deadline

    This section extends an existing Forest Service authority. A prior law set a deadline of September 30, 2019 for that authority. This section replaces that old date with September 30, 2027. In plain terms, it keeps a specific Forest Service program or power active for roughly eight more years beyond its original end date.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Forest Service and anyone who relies on the authority granted under the original 2014 law, such as contractors, landowners, or communities near national forests.

    Tradeoff

    Extending the deadline lets the Forest Service keep using this authority longer, but it also delays any review of whether the authority should be updated or ended.

    Show the exact bill text

    Section 426 of division G of Public Law 113–76 ( 16 U.S.C. 565a–1 note) shall be applied by substituting September 30, 2027 for September 30, 2019 .

74. Extension of forest planning rule authority

    This section extends a policy from a 2000 law about national forest management. That older law set rules for how the Forest Service plans forest use. It was last updated to apply through fiscal year 2019. This section swaps out that 2019 date and replaces it with 2027. The effect is to keep the same authority or rules in place for another several years without rewriting the underlying law.

    Who this affects

    The U.S. Forest Service and anyone affected by national forest land management plans, including timber industries, recreation users, and conservation groups.

    Tradeoff

    Extending the existing authority gives the Forest Service continuity, but it also delays any updates or reforms to the underlying forest planning rules.

    Show the exact bill text

    shall be applied by substituting fiscal year 2027 for fiscal year 2019

75. Tribal facility lease rules and consultation

    This section makes two changes related to leases that the federal government pays for tribal facilities. First, it sets a clear start date: a lease term can only begin on or after the day the tribe submits the lease proposal. It cannot be backdated. Second, it requires the Secretaries of Interior and Health and Human Services to consult with tribes and tribal organizations during fiscal year 2027. That consultation must happen through public comment and other ways. The goal is to develop a consistent and transparent process for how these lease payments are handled.

    Who this affects

    Federally recognized tribes and tribal organizations that lease space to deliver self-determination programs. It also affects the Departments of Interior and Health and Human Services.

    Tradeoff

    Setting a firm lease start date protects against backdated costs, but it may limit how tribes can structure agreements they negotiated before submitting a formal proposal.

    Show the exact bill text

    the initial lease term shall commence no earlier than the date of receipt of the lease proposal

76. Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund extension

    This section extends a funding authority for the Forest Ecosystem Health and Recovery Fund through 2027. The original authority was set to run through 2020. This bill simply replaces '2020' with '2027' wherever that year appears in the older law. That keeps the fund active so money can still be used for forest health and recovery work without new legislation.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies that manage forest health and recovery programs, and communities near national forests that benefit from those programs.

    Tradeoff

    Extending the fund keeps forest recovery work funded longer, but it also continues spending authority without a full review of the program's results.

    Show the exact bill text

    shall be applied by substituting fiscal year 2027 for fiscal year 2020 each place it appears.

77. Land and Water Conservation Fund allocation rules

    This section sets rules for how Land and Water Conservation Fund money is spent in fiscal year 2027. Within 45 days of the law passing, the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture must direct that money to specific projects listed in a table in the bill's report. Neither the President nor anyone he assigns can send that money to different projects or amounts. If a project will be carried out in a new area outside the original plan, the agency must give Congress 30 days' written notice first. The agencies must also give Congress a backup list of extra land purchase projects alongside the next budget. Only projects with a willing seller and an active appraisal can be on that list. Finally, both agencies must send Congress quarterly reports on how the fund's money is being used.

    Who this affects

    Federal land management agencies (Interior, Agriculture, National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management) and landowners near federal lands who may be willing sellers.

    Tradeoff

    Congress keeps tight control over how conservation land-purchase money is spent, which limits flexibility for agencies to respond to new opportunities.

    Show the exact bill text

    Neither the President nor his designee may allocate any amounts that are made available for any fiscal year under subsection (a) of section 200303 of title 54, United States Code, other than in amounts and for projects and activities that are allocated under subsection (a)(1) of this section

78. Federal policy for forest biomass energy

    This section directs three federal agencies to work together on forest energy policy. The agencies are the Department of Energy, the Department of Agriculture, and the Environmental Protection Agency. They must make sure federal rules about using wood and other forest materials for energy are consistent across all agencies. They must treat forest biomass as carbon neutral and as a renewable energy source. This only applies when using forest biomass does not turn forests into non-forest land. The agencies must also set clear policies that encourage private investment in wood harvesting, forest care, and wood product manufacturing. They must support state efforts to produce and use forest biomass.

    Who this affects

    Private companies in the forestry and wood products industry, landowners, and state governments. Federal agencies must align their rules to support these groups.

    Tradeoff

    Treating forest biomass as carbon neutral and renewable could encourage more wood-based energy production, but critics argue that burning wood releases carbon that takes decades for new tree growth to reabsorb.

    Show the exact bill text

    reflect the carbon neutrality of forest bioenergy and recognize biomass as a renewable energy source, provided the use of forest biomass for energy production does not cause conversion of forests to non-forest use

79. Alaska small remote incinerator exemption from 2011 EPA rules

    This section blocks money in this bill from being used to carry out a 2011 EPA rule on certain incinerators. The rule covers commercial and industrial solid waste incinerators (found at 40 CFR part 60, subparts CCCC and DDDD). The block applies only to units in Alaska that the rule itself calls 'small, remote incinerator units.' While this block is in place, the EPA must follow the older rules that existed before March 21, 2011. The block stays in effect until the EPA issues a new rule to replace the 2011 one.

    Who this affects

    Small, remote incinerator operators in Alaska who would otherwise have to meet the 2011 EPA emission standards. It also affects EPA staff responsible for enforcing those standards.

    Tradeoff

    Operators of small remote incinerators in Alaska are relieved from newer, stricter emission rules, but communities near those incinerators remain subject to the older, less strict standards.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available in this Act may be used to implement or enforce the regulation issued on March 21, 2011 at 40 CFR part 60 subparts CCCC and DDDD with respect to units in the State of Alaska that are defined as small, remote incinerator units in those regulations

80. Alaska timber sales and export rules

    This section sets rules for timber sales in the U.S. Forest Service's Alaska region. A timber sale cannot be advertised if it would lose money under the Forest Service's standard appraisal method. Western red cedar that Alaska processors do not need must first be offered to processors in the lower 48 states at normal domestic prices. Any western red cedar still unsold after that can be exported. Alaska yellow cedar can be sold at export prices right away if the timber sale holder chooses.

    Who this affects

    Timber companies and processors operating in Alaska and the contiguous 48 states who buy or process western red cedar and Alaska yellow cedar from federal lands.

    Tradeoff

    Protecting taxpayers from money-losing timber sales limits how much timber can be sold, but the export and domestic-priority rules affect which buyers get access to the timber and at what price.

    Show the exact bill text

    No timber sale in Alaska's Region 10 shall be advertised if the indicated rate is deficit (defined as the value of the timber is not sufficient to cover all logging and stumpage costs and provide a normal profit and risk allowance under the Forest Service's appraisal process) when appraised using a residual value appraisal.

81. Transfer of transportation funds to Federal Highway Administration

    This section allows the Interior Department and the Agriculture Department to move certain funds to the Federal Highway Administration. The funds being moved must already be subject to specific rules and limits set in federal law (54 U.S.C. 200402). Once moved, the money can be used for transportation projects run by what the law calls 'covered agencies,' which include agencies like the National Park Service and the Forest Service. This gives those departments more flexibility in how transportation work gets done on federal lands.

    Who this affects

    Federal land management agencies such as the National Park Service and the Forest Service. It also involves the Federal Highway Administration, which would carry out the transportation projects.

    Tradeoff

    Allowing funds to be shifted to the Federal Highway Administration may speed up transportation projects on federal lands, but it also moves spending decisions away from the original agencies.

    Show the exact bill text

    Funds made available or allocated in this Act to the Department of the Interior or the Department of Agriculture that are subject to the allocations and limitations in 54 U.S.C. 200402(e) and prohibitions in 54 U.S.C. 200402(f) may be further allocated or reallocated to the Federal Highway Administration for transportation projects of the covered agencies defined in 54 U.S.C. 200401(2).

82. Block on air permits for livestock greenhouse gas emissions

    This section stops any federal money from being used to write or enforce rules that would require livestock farmers to get Clean Air Act Title V permits. Those permits normally apply to large sources of air pollution. The section covers four gases tied to animal agriculture: carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, water vapor, and methane. The block applies to funds from this bill and from any other federal law.

    Who this affects

    Livestock farmers and ranchers who raise cattle, pigs, poultry, or other animals. It also affects the EPA, which enforces Clean Air Act permits.

    Tradeoff

    Livestock producers avoid the cost and paperwork of federal air permits, but the restriction limits the government's ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from farm animals.

    Show the exact bill text

    none of the funds made available in this Act or any other Act may be used to promulgate or implement any regulation requiring the issuance of permits under title V of the Clean Air Act ( 42 U.S.C. 7661 et seq. ) for carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, water vapor, or methane emissions resulting from biological processes associated with livestock production.

83. Block on greenhouse gas reporting for manure management

    This section stops federal money from being used to enforce any rule that requires farms to report greenhouse gas emissions from manure management systems. It applies to funds from this bill and any other federal law. The block stays in place as long as no funds are spent on enforcement of such a reporting requirement.

    Who this affects

    Farms and agricultural operations that manage manure. Also affects federal agencies, like the EPA, that would otherwise enforce greenhouse gas reporting rules.

    Tradeoff

    Farms avoid the cost and paperwork of reporting manure-related emissions, but federal agencies collect less data on agricultural greenhouse gas output.

    Show the exact bill text

    none of the funds made available in this or any other Act may be used to implement any provision in a rule, if that provision requires mandatory reporting of greenhouse gas emissions from manure management systems.

84. Ban on regulating lead in ammunition and fishing tackle

    This section blocks federal agencies from using any appropriated funds to regulate the lead content of ammunition, ammunition parts, or fishing tackle. The ban applies under the Toxic Substances Control Act or any other law. Because no funds can be spent on such regulation, no federal agency can write or enforce rules limiting lead in these products.

    Who this affects

    Hunters, anglers, and manufacturers of ammunition and fishing tackle. It also affects wildlife and water bodies that may be exposed to lead from these products.

    Tradeoff

    Preventing lead regulation keeps costs lower for hunters and anglers, but it also means no federal limits on lead that may enter the environment from these products.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to regulate the lead content of ammunition, ammunition components, or fishing tackle under the Toxic Substances Control Act ( 15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq. ) or any other law.

85. Extension of overtime pay protections for federal law enforcement

    This section changes a law that limits how much overtime pay certain federal law enforcement officers can receive. The original law covered calendar years 2021 through 2024. This section extends that coverage to include 2025 and 2026, and every year after that. In other words, the overtime pay rules that were set to expire after 2024 will now stay in place permanently.

    Who this affects

    Federal law enforcement officers who earn overtime pay. Federal agencies that pay those officers.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping the overtime pay cap in place long-term gives agencies predictable payroll costs, but it also means officers cannot earn more overtime pay than the cap allows, no matter how many extra hours they work.

    Show the exact bill text

    striking 2021 or 2022 or 2023 or 2024 each place it appears and inserting calendar years 2021 through 2026 and each calendar year thereafter

86. Extension of a prior law provision to 2027

    This section changes a date in an older spending law from December 24, 2022, to October 1, 2027. The older law is Section 424(a) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014. By swapping the date, whatever rule or permission that section set up is extended to stay in effect until October 1, 2027. The underlying provision relates to Interior Department or related agency operations under that 2014 law.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies and programs covered by Section 424(a) of the 2014 spending law. Anyone who depends on the rule or authority that section established.

    Tradeoff

    Extending the date keeps an existing rule in place longer, which provides continuity but also delays any update or expiration that Congress might otherwise have reviewed.

    Show the exact bill text

    Section 424(a) of title IV of division G of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 ( Public Law 113–76 ) shall be applied by substituting October 1, 2027 for December 24, 2022 .

87. Protecting hunting, fishing, and shooting access on federal land

    This section blocks federal agencies from using any funds to close federal land to hunting, fishing, or recreational shooting, as long as those activities were allowed on that land as of January 1, 2013, and followed the land's management plan at that time. There are two exceptions. First, the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture can close land temporarily for up to 30 days for a special event or for public safety. Second, that closure can be extended one time for up to 90 more days if extreme weather or public safety requires it. The section also makes clear that states keep their own authority to manage and regulate fish and wildlife under state law.

    Who this affects

    People who hunt, fish, or shoot recreationally on federal lands. Federal land managers at the Interior Department and the U.S. Forest Service are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    Outdoor recreationists gain stronger protections against new closures, but federal agencies lose some flexibility to restrict access on lands they manage.

    Show the exact bill text

    none of the funds made available by this or any other Act for any fiscal year may be used to prohibit the use of or access to Federal land...for hunting, fishing, or recreational shooting if such use or access— (1) was not prohibited on such Federal land as of January 1, 2013

88. Ban on diversity, equity, and inclusion funding

    This section blocks any money from this bill from being spent on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) work. That includes running DEI offices, programs, or activities. It also covers DEI training. No part of the agency can use these funds to carry out any such work.

    Who this affects

    Federal employees and offices under the Department of the Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, and related agencies who currently run or participate in DEI programs or training.

    Tradeoff

    Supporters say it saves money and removes programs they see as outside the agency's core mission. Critics say it ends efforts to address barriers faced by underrepresented workers and communities.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to implement, administer, apply, enforce, or carry out any office, program, or activity for the purposes of diversity, equity, and inclusion training or implementation.

89. Ban on funding for Critical Race Theory programs

    This section blocks any money from this spending bill from being used for programs, projects, or activities that promote Critical Race Theory (CRT). It also blocks funding for anything connected to concepts associated with CRT. The bill does not define what counts as a 'concept associated with Critical Race Theory,' which leaves that determination open to interpretation by agencies or courts.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies funded by this bill, including the Department of the Interior and related agencies. It also affects employees, contractors, and grant recipients who run training or educational programs using these funds.

    Tradeoff

    Supporters say this prevents taxpayer money from funding a specific ideology, while critics say the vague language could block a wide range of training or educational activities.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to carry out any program, project, or activity that promotes or advances Critical Race Theory or any concept associated with Critical Race Theory.

90. Protection for religious or moral beliefs about marriage

    This section says no federal money from this bill or past spending bills can be used to punish a person who believes marriage is only between a man and a woman. The protection covers people who speak or act on that belief based on religion or personal moral conviction. Federal agencies could not raise that person's taxes, deny tax exemptions, block charitable deductions, cut off grants or contracts, deny loans or licenses, remove accreditation or certifications, or bar access to federal property or programs. It also says the federal government must still treat a person as accredited, licensed, or certified if the only reason they would lose that status is holding or acting on that belief.

    Who this affects

    Any person, organization, or institution that holds a religious or moral belief that marriage is between one man and one woman. Federal agencies and programs that fund, license, or accredit such persons are also affected.

    Tradeoff

    People and groups with that belief about marriage are shielded from losing federal benefits or standing, but others who hold different beliefs do not receive the same specific protection under this section.

    Show the exact bill text

    none of the funds provided by this Act, or previous appropriations Acts, shall be used in whole or in part to take any discriminatory action against a person, wholly or partially, on the basis that such person speaks, or acts, in accordance with a sincerely held religious belief, or moral conviction, that marriage is, or should be recognized as, a union of one man and one woman.

91. Reinstate Minnesota hardrock mineral leases

    This section requires the Secretary of the Interior to reinstate two hardrock mineral leases in the Superior National Forest in Minnesota. The leases were originally issued in 2019 and are identified by the numbers MNES-01352 and MNES-01353. The Secretary must do this within 30 days of the law passing. The section also blocks courts from reviewing or overturning this action. It overrides any other laws that might otherwise prevent the reinstatement.

    Who this affects

    Mining companies that hold or are connected to the two named leases in Minnesota's Superior National Forest. It also affects people and communities near that forest who may have interests in how the land is used.

    Tradeoff

    Reinstating the leases could allow hardrock mining exploration to resume in the Superior National Forest, but it removes the ability of courts to review the decision and bypasses other laws that might otherwise apply.

    Show the exact bill text

    not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act the Secretary of the Interior shall reinstate the hardrock mineral leases in the Superior National Forest in the State of Minnesota issued in 2019 and identified as MNES-01352 and MNES-01353.

92. Ban on using social cost of carbon in federal decisions

    This section blocks federal agencies from spending any money to use the 'social cost of carbon' in their work. The social cost of carbon is a dollar figure that estimates the economic harm caused by releasing one ton of carbon dioxide. Agencies use it in cost-benefit studies to weigh the climate impact of rules and policies. Under this section, no agency may include that figure in any cost-benefit analysis, rulemaking, guidance document, or other official action. The ban covers work done under several specific executive orders and a 2021 government technical report. It also bars agencies from using the figure as a reason or justification for any rule or policy.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies that write rules or conduct cost-benefit analyses. It also affects businesses, researchers, and the public who rely on agency rulemakings that weigh climate costs.

    Tradeoff

    Removing the social cost of carbon from agency decisions may lower estimated regulatory costs for industry, but it also means agencies would not formally count expected climate-related economic harms when setting rules.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to consider or incorporate the social cost of carbon— (1) as part of any cost-benefit analysis required or performed pursuant to— (A) any law...

93. Enacting three separate House-passed bills into law

    Section 443 takes three bills that the House already passed and makes them law by including them in this appropriations act. The three bills are: a law letting the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians reacquire historic lands; a law clarifying mining regulations; and a law removing land-use restrictions on a parcel in Paducah, Kentucky. The Archivist of the United States must print the full text of all three bills as an appendix when this act is published in official government records.

    Who this affects

    The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, mining companies and regulators, and landowners or local governments near the Paducah, Kentucky parcel are all affected. The general public is also affected because three separate policy changes are bundled into one spending bill.

    Tradeoff

    Bundling these bills into an appropriations act gets them enacted faster, but it limits the chance for separate debate and amendment on each individual policy.

    Show the exact bill text

    The provisions of the following bills of the 119th Congress are hereby enacted into law: (1) H.R. 226 (Eastern Band of Cherokee Historic Lands Reacquisition Act)... (2) H.R. 1366 (Mining Regulatory Clarity Act)... (3) H.R. 1276 (To remove restrictions from a parcel of land in Paducah, Kentucky)

94. Protection of state water rights for federal land users

    This section blocks federal money from being used to force anyone to give up a state-granted water right. The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management cannot make the transfer or surrender of a water right a condition for getting, renewing, or extending a permit, lease, allotment, easement, or other land use agreement. This applies to funds from this bill and from any other federal law. In short, federal agencies cannot use the permit process as leverage to take away water rights that states have already granted.

    Who this affects

    Farmers, ranchers, and others who hold water rights under state law and also need federal land use permits or leases from the Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management.

    Tradeoff

    Land users keep their state-granted water rights intact, but federal agencies lose one tool they could otherwise use to manage water use on federal lands.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be obligated to require or request, as a condition of the issuance, renewal, or extension of any Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management permit, lease, allotment, easement, or other land use and occupancy, arrangement, the transfer, or relinquishment of any water right, in whole, or in part, granted under State law.

95. Block on withdrawing federal land without Congress

    This section stops any agency from using funds in this bill to pull federal land out of public use. Specifically, no money can be used to close off land from public entry, mining claims, mineral leasing, or sale. The only exception is if Congress passes a law that directly allows the withdrawal. Without that congressional approval, the land must stay open under existing public land rules.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies that manage public lands, such as the Bureau of Land Management. It also affects mining companies, energy developers, and others who seek access to federal land.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping Congress in control of land withdrawals limits executive branch flexibility, but it also means large land closures require broader legislative approval.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to withdraw any Federal land from any form of entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land laws...unless such withdrawal is authorized by an Act of Congress.

96. Block on Allegheny National Forest oil and gas rules

    This section says none of the money in this bill can be used to write or update rules about oil and gas drilling on reserved mineral rights inside the Allegheny National Forest in Pennsylvania. The Mineral Leasing Act gives the government some authority over how those minerals are developed. This section stops agencies from spending any funds on new or revised regulations under that part of the law, at least for the year this bill covers.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies that oversee mineral leasing, private mineral rights holders in the Allegheny National Forest, and people who live near or use that forest.

    Tradeoff

    Blocking these rules keeps current drilling practices in place and reduces regulatory costs, but it also prevents the government from updating environmental or safety standards for that forest land.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to issue or revise any regulation pursuant to Section 17(o) of the Mineral Leasing Act ( 30 U.S.C. 226(o) ) relating to oil and gas development of outstanding and reserved mineral rights within the Allegheny National Forest.

97. Higher land value standard for national forest exchanges

    This section changes how land values are calculated in national forest land exchanges. Under current law, the government uses the 'fair appraised value' of the land. This section requires the government to use the 'highest fair appraised value, including the historical fair appraised value.' That means the Secretary of Agriculture must consider past appraisals alongside current ones, and use whichever value is highest when completing a land exchange.

    Who this affects

    People or groups exchanging private land for national forest land, and the U.S. Forest Service, which manages these exchanges.

    Tradeoff

    Using the highest historical appraisal could benefit landowners exchanging with the government, but it may also require the government to accept less or give more land in return.

    Show the exact bill text

    striking of the fair appraised value of such and inserting of the highest fair appraised value, including the historical fair appraised value, as determined by the Secretary of Agriculture in accordance with this section, of such

98. Protection of aerial fire retardant use

    This section stops any federal agency from using government money to ban the spraying of fire retardant from aircraft. The ban on banning applies to funds from this bill and any other federal law. As long as this restriction is in place, no agency can use its budget to block or prohibit aerial fire retardant operations.

    Who this affects

    Federal agencies that manage wildfire response, and communities and forests in areas where aerial fire retardant is used during wildfires.

    Tradeoff

    Keeping aerial retardant available may help fight wildfires faster, but it limits the ability of agencies to restrict its use if environmental or safety concerns arise.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to ban the use of aerially applied fire retardant.

99. California metal shredding facility rules

    This section blocks federal money from being used to carry out any California rule about metal shredding facilities if that rule goes beyond or differs from federal solid waste law. California has a special agreement with the EPA that lets it set its own rules for these facilities. This section says federal funds cannot support any California rule that is stricter or different from what the federal Solid Waste Disposal Act already requires.

    Who this affects

    Metal shredding facilities in California and the state agency that regulates them. It also affects the EPA's Region IX office, which oversees California under the existing agreement.

    Tradeoff

    Federal funds are protected from supporting stronger state rules, which limits California's ability to go beyond federal standards but keeps national rules uniform for the industry.

    Show the exact bill text

    None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to implement a regulation issued by the State of California...to regulate metal shredding facilities in a manner that is inconsistent with or in any respect different from the requirements of the Solid Waste Disposal Act

100. Florida wetland permit program approval made permanent

     This section gives legal force to a 2020 EPA decision. That decision let Florida run its own permit program for filling or dredging wetlands. Normally the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers handles these permits under the Clean Water Act. Florida applied to take over that role in the state. The EPA approved the request in December 2020. This section makes that approval as binding as if Congress wrote it directly into law. This prevents future administrations or courts from easily reversing the approval.

     Who this affects

     Florida state agencies, landowners, and developers who need permits to fill or dredge wetlands in Florida. It also affects environmental groups who may want to challenge the state-run program.

     Tradeoff

     Florida gains more control over its own wetland permitting, but federal oversight of those permits is reduced.

     Show the exact bill text

     The notice of the Environmental Protection Agency approving the State of Florida's request to carry out a permit program for the discharge of dredged or fill material pursuant to section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act...shall have the force and effect of law.

101. Abandoned mine funds exempt from federal property rules

     This section blocks the use of abandoned mine cleanup money for a specific federal rule. The rule in question is 2 C.F.R. section 200.311. That rule covers what happens to property bought with federal grant money when a grant ends. Under that rule, the federal government can reclaim such property. This section says that rule cannot be applied to payments made to states and tribes for cleaning up old, abandoned mines. Those payments come from the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund, run by the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement.

     Who this affects

     States and federally recognized Indian Tribes that receive federal money for abandoned mine cleanup projects.

     Tradeoff

     States and tribes keep more control over property bought with abandoned mine cleanup funds, but the federal government gives up a standard tool it uses to reclaim grant-funded property.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds made available by this or any other Act for payments to States and federally recognized Indian Tribes for reclamation of abandoned mine lands and other related activities under the heading Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement—Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund may be used to implement, administer, or enforce section 200.311 of title 2, Code of Federal Regulations.

102. Block on endangered mussel protections in Texas and New Mexico

     This section stops any federal money from being used to carry out a 2024 rule that gave endangered or threatened status to seven freshwater mussel species. Those species are the Guadalupe Fatmucket, Texas Fatmucket, Guadalupe Orb, Texas Pimpleback, Balcones Spike, False Spike, and Texas Fawnsfoot. The rule also set aside critical habitat areas for these mussels. As long as this ban is in place, federal agencies cannot enforce the protections that rule created.

     Who this affects

     The seven listed freshwater mussel species lose federal protections. Landowners, water utilities, and industries near the affected rivers and streams in Texas and New Mexico would no longer face federal restrictions tied to this rule.

     Tradeoff

     Blocking the rule removes regulatory burdens on land and water users, but it also removes federal protections for mussels that the rule found to be at risk of extinction.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce the final rule titled Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status With Critical Habitat for Guadalupe Fatmucket, Texas Fatmucket, Guadalupe Orb, Texas Pimpleback, Balcones Spike, and False Spike, and Threatened Species Status With Section 4(d) Rule and Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot (89 Fed. Reg. 48034 (June 4, 2024)).

103. Block on BLM fluid mineral leasing rule

     This section stops any federal money from being used to carry out a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) rule published on April 23, 2024. That rule, called 'Fluid Mineral Leases and Leasing Process,' updated how the BLM handles oil and gas leases on public lands. The block applies to funds from this bill and from any other federal spending law. As long as this restriction is in place, the BLM cannot put that 2024 rule into effect.

     Who this affects

     Energy companies that lease federal land for oil and gas drilling. It also affects BLM staff and the public lands those leases cover.

     Tradeoff

     Blocking the rule may make it easier for energy companies to lease federal land under older rules, but it also prevents any updated environmental and process requirements from taking effect.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds made available by this or any other Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce the final rule titled Fluid Mineral Leases and Leasing Process published by the Bureau of Land Management in the Federal Register on April 23, 2024 (89 Fed. Reg. 30916).

104. Permanent extension of a land management rule

     This section changes a rule that was set to expire. The original law said the rule applied from 2012 through 2027. This section removes the 2027 end date. The rule now applies starting in 2012 with no end date. The rule comes from a 2011 spending law covering the Department of the Interior.

     Who this affects

     Federal land managers and anyone subject to the specific Interior Department rule referenced in the 2011 law.

     Tradeoff

     Making the rule permanent removes the need for Congress to renew it, but it also removes a future opportunity for Congress to revisit or change it.

     Show the exact bill text

     striking For fiscal years 2012 through 2027 and inserting During fiscal year 2012 and thereafter

105. Public access to Hetch Hetchy and Lake Eleanor areas

     This section blocks the use of any money from this bill to limit public access to the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and Lake Eleanor Basin in California. No funds can be used to restrict or block people from visiting these areas for recreation or other public use. In short, the government cannot spend this bill's money to close off or limit access to these two water basin areas.

     Who this affects

     Members of the public who visit or use Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and Lake Eleanor Basin for recreation. It also affects federal and local agencies that manage these areas.

     Tradeoff

     Keeping these areas open to the public supports recreation, but it may limit managers from using these funds to restrict access for safety, conservation, or water supply protection reasons.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds made available by this Act may be obligated, expended, or used in any manner to restrict or impede access to the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and Lake Eleanor Basin areas for public recreation, benefit, and use.

106. No funding for the Presidio Trust

     This section blocks any money from this spending bill from going to the Presidio Trust. The Presidio Trust is a federal agency. It manages the Presidio of San Francisco, a former military base that is now part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. With no funds allowed, the Trust could not use this bill's money for operations, maintenance, or programs.

     Who this affects

     The Presidio Trust and the people who use or work at the Presidio of San Francisco. This includes visitors, staff, and tenants of the park.

     Tradeoff

     Blocking these funds could reduce money available for managing the Presidio, but it also means no federal appropriations dollars are spent on the Trust this year.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for the Presidio Trust.

107. Extension of wildlife habitat incentive program deadline

     This section extends a deadline in an existing farm and conservation law. The original law set a cutoff date of October 1, 2023. This section changes that date to October 1, 2027. That gives the affected program four more years to operate before it expires.

     Who this affects

     Landowners and farmers who participate in the wildlife habitat program under the Agricultural Act of 2014. Federal agencies administering the program are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     Extending the deadline keeps the program running longer, which may benefit landowners seeking funding, but it also extends federal spending obligations for four additional years.

     Show the exact bill text

     Section 8302(b) of the Agricultural Act of 2014 ( 16 U.S.C. 3851a(b) ) shall be applied by substituting October 1, 2027 for October 1, 2023 .

108. Ban on requiring dog testing for pesticide and chemical approvals

     This section stops federal funds from being used to require dog testing when companies apply to register pesticides or chemicals. It covers products regulated under two laws: the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act. Dog testing can still be required in two situations. The first is when the EPA Administrator finds no viable alternative test method exists. The second is when an alternative method does not meet the best available science standard. Outside those two exceptions, the EPA cannot demand dog tests or data from dog tests as part of an approval application.

     Who this affects

     Companies applying to register pesticides or industrial chemicals with the EPA. The EPA itself is also affected, as it loses the authority to routinely require dog tests.

     Tradeoff

     Reducing dog testing may lower animal harm, but it could limit the data available to regulators reviewing the safety of certain chemicals.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to require, on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, testing on dogs or the submission of data derived from testing conducted in dogs in order to approve an application for any product regulated under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act

109. Block on a specific air quality rule

     This section stops any money in this bill from being used to carry out one specific part of federal air quality rules. That rule is found at section 63.7(f)(5) of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations. The provision does not repeal the rule, but it prevents federal agencies from putting it into effect, managing it, or enforcing it for the year this bill covers. In plain terms, the government cannot spend money to make anyone follow that particular requirement.

     Who this affects

     Businesses or facilities subject to the specific air quality standard listed in 40 C.F.R. 63.7(f)(5), and the federal agencies that normally enforce it.

     Tradeoff

     Regulated facilities get relief from that specific requirement for the year, but any air quality protections the rule was meant to provide would not be enforced during that time.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to implement, administer, or enforce section 63.7(f)(5) of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations.

110. Coastal barrier map correction for North Topsail Beach, North Carolina

     This section tells the Secretary of the Interior to update federal maps within 30 days. The maps cover Unit L06 of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System. Any parcel in North Topsail Beach, North Carolina, that local zoning already designates for uses other than conservation must be removed from Unit L06. Land inside the Coastal Barrier Resources System normally cannot receive federal flood insurance, federal loans, or federal development funding. Removing parcels from the system makes those federal benefits available for those parcels again. The change applies only to the parts of Unit L06 inside North Topsail Beach town limits. The revised maps take effect 30 days after the law is signed.

     Who this affects

     Property owners in North Topsail Beach, North Carolina, whose land sits in Unit L06 but is zoned for non-conservation uses. Federal agencies that manage flood insurance, loans, or development assistance in coastal barrier areas are also affected.

     Tradeoff

     Removing parcels from the coastal barrier unit lets owners there access federal flood insurance and development funding, but it reduces protections that limit federal spending on development in vulnerable coastal areas.

     Show the exact bill text

     the Secretary of the Interior shall make such corrections to the maps described in subsection (e) as are necessary to exclude from Unit L06 of the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System each parcel in the town of North Topsail Beach, North Carolina, that is designated by local zoning ordinance for purposes other than conservation as of the date of the enactment of this Act.

111. Renaming Apostle Islands National Lakeshore as a National Park and Preserve

     This section renames Apostle Islands National Lakeshore in Wisconsin. It becomes 'Apostle Islands National Park and Preserve,' split into two parts: a National Park and a National Preserve. The Park bans hunting and trapping except where tribal treaties allow it. The Preserve keeps the same hunting, trapping, and fishing rules that existed before the name change. Fishing rules stay the same across both areas. Tribal treaty rights are fully protected. All government documents that said 'Apostle Islands National Lakeshore' now refer to the new name. Visitor centers must display signs about the area's history, including Ojibwe tribes, fur trade, logging, lighthouses, and fishing.

     Who this affects

     Visitors, hunters, anglers, and trappers who use the area. Ojibwe tribes with treaty rights in the region are also directly affected.

     Tradeoff

     Upgrading the site to a National Park and Preserve brings more recognition, but it bans hunting and trapping in the Park portion for most users while keeping those activities allowed in the Preserve portion.

     Show the exact bill text

     Except where permitted under a treaty, statute, or executive order pertaining to a Tribe, hunting and trapping are prohibited within Apostle Islands National Park.

112. Block on Smithsonian space vehicle transfer rules

     This section stops the Smithsonian Institution from spending any money to carry out new rules about transferring space vehicles. Those rules were added by a recent law (Public Law 119-21, Section 40005). Until this funding block is lifted, the Smithsonian cannot act on those changes.

     Who this affects

     The Smithsonian Institution and any parties involved in transferring space vehicles under the affected law.

     Tradeoff

     Blocking the funds prevents the new space vehicle transfer rules from taking effect, but it also delays any benefits those rules were meant to provide.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds provided in this Act may be used by the Smithsonian Institution to implement the amendments to Chapter 203 of title 51, United States Code in Sec. 40005 of Public Law 119–21 relating to Space Vehicle Transfer.

113. Block on EPA chemical risk assessments

     This section stops any money in this bill from being used for the EPA's Integrated Risk Information System, known as IRIS. IRIS is a program that studies how chemicals affect human health. The EPA uses IRIS reports to set safety standards for air, water, and soil. This section means the EPA cannot develop, finish, or publish any new IRIS health risk assessments while this funding law is in effect.

     Who this affects

     The EPA and its staff who run the IRIS program. Also affected are federal and state agencies, researchers, and the public who rely on IRIS reports to set or follow health and environmental safety rules.

     Tradeoff

     Blocking IRIS work saves money and may reduce regulatory burdens on industries, but it could also delay updates to chemical safety standards that protect public health.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to develop, finalize, or issue assessments under the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS).

114. Protection of mining claims from forfeiture for 2012 fee payments

     This section stops the Interior Department from canceling certain unpatented mining claims. Specifically, it protects claims where the holder paid the annual maintenance fee by September 1, 2012. The Interior Department cannot void those claims just because the holder skipped the separate 'assessment work' requirement or related paperwork for that same year. This protection still applies even if the fee was later refunded to the holder. However, the protection does not cover claims where the fee was waived rather than paid for the year ending September 1, 2012.

     Who this affects

     Holders of unpatented lode mining claims, mill sites, or tunnel sites on federal land who paid their 2012 maintenance fee. The Interior Department is also directly affected, as it cannot declare those claims forfeited.

     Tradeoff

     Mining claim holders keep their claims despite missing a paperwork or work requirement, but taxpayer-funded federal land management must continue recognizing those claims without the full compliance that the law normally requires.

     Show the exact bill text

     None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the Secretary of the Interior to declare forfeited, abandoned, or void any unpatented lode mining claim, mill site, or tunnel site...for which the claim maintenance fee required by that section...was paid on or before September 1, 2012

115. Zero funding provision

     This section sets a funding amount of zero dollars. It is a placeholder or limiting provision. No money is provided under whatever line item or program this section covers. The bill text gives no further detail about which program or activity receives this zero amount.

     Who this affects

     Any program or activity tied to this funding line would receive no money. Without more context, the exact affected party is unclear.

     Tradeoff

     Setting funding at zero saves federal spending but provides no resources for whatever program or activity this line covers.

     Show the exact bill text

     $0.