{ "id": "R44924", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R44924", "active": true, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 625017, "date": "2020-05-13", "retrieved": "2020-05-19T13:40:23.987400", "title": "National Park Service Deferred Maintenance: Frequently Asked Questions", "summary": "This report addresses frequently asked questions about the National Park Service\u2019s (NPS\u2019s) backlog of deferred maintenance\u2014maintenance that was not performed as scheduled or as needed and was put off to a future time. NPS\u2019s deferred maintenance, also known as the maintenance backlog, was estimated for FY2018 (the most recent year available) at $11.920 billion. More than half of the NPS backlog is in transportation-related assets. Other federal land management agencies also have maintenance backlogs, but NPS\u2019s is the largest and has drawn the most congressional attention. \nDuring the past decade (FY2009-FY2018), NPS\u2019s maintenance backlog grew by $1.751 billion in nominal dollars while declining by $0.368 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars. Many factors might contribute to growth or reduction in deferred maintenance, including the aging of NPS assets, the availability of funding for maintenance activities, acquisitions of new assets, agency management of the backlog, completion of individual projects, changes in construction and related costs, and changes in measurement and reporting methodologies. The backlog is distributed unevenly among states and territories, with California, the District of Columbia, and Virginia having the largest amounts of NPS deferred maintenance. The amounts also vary among individual park units. In terms of individual projects, transportation-related projects are among those with the highest deferred maintenance estimates.\nSources of funding to address NPS deferred maintenance include discretionary appropriations, allocations from the Department of Transportation, park entrance and concessions fees, donations, and others. It is not possible to determine the total amount of funding from these sources that NPS has allocated each year to address deferred maintenance, because NPS does not aggregate these amounts in its budget reporting. \nNPS prioritizes its deferred maintenance projects based on the condition of assets and their importance to the parks\u2019 mission, as well as other criteria related to financial sustainability, resource protection, visitor use, and health and safety. NPS has taken a number of steps over the decade to improve its asset management systems and strategies. Some observers, including the Government Accountability Office (GAO), have recommended further improvements. Both GAO and NPS itself have identified some challenges to managing the maintenance backlog, such as challenges related to disposing of unneeded assets.\nCongress has addressed NPS deferred maintenance through oversight, appropriations, and other legislation. For example, the National Parks Centennial Act (P.L. 114-289) established two new funding sources available for NPS maintenance needs. Some Members of Congress and other stakeholders have proposed additional measures. Bills in the 116th Congress to increase NPS funding for deferred maintenance\u2014including H.R. 1225, S. 500, and S. 3422\u2014would draw from federal energy revenues currently going to the Treasury. Other proposed funding sources have included monies from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, income tax overpayments and contributions, new motorfuel taxes, coin and postage stamp sales, and new fees on visas and travel authorizations for foreign visitors (S. 2783), among others. Other bills focus on funding and prioritization for transportation-related deferred maintenance in particular (H.R. 5503).\nThe extent to which NPS deferred maintenance funding should be a priority, given other NPS and broader governmental needs, has been under debate. The additional funding sources in some bills have been opposed for various reasons. Some stakeholders have suggested that NPS\u2019s maintenance backlog could be reduced without additional funding\u2014for example, by improving the agency\u2019s capital investment strategies or increasing the role of nonfederal partners in park management.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44924", "sha1": "be8fb9afd57bbce25a84232e9e94fd422ec963da", "filename": "files/20200513_R44924_be8fb9afd57bbce25a84232e9e94fd422ec963da.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44924_files&id=/0.png": "files/20200513_R44924_images_68881a49e69b6bd25224e270aa20f4bf5bd58985.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44924", "sha1": "2268956c707e595c80a2520e296675a792604207", "filename": "files/20200513_R44924_2268956c707e595c80a2520e296675a792604207.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4841, "name": "Federal Land Management" } ] }, { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 463522, "date": "2017-08-23", "retrieved": "2017-10-02T22:41:36.580500", "title": "The National Park Service\u2019s Maintenance Backlog: Frequently Asked Questions", "summary": "This report addresses frequently asked questions about the National Park Service\u2019s (NPS\u2019s) backlog of deferred maintenance\u2014maintenance that was not performed as scheduled or as needed and was put off to a future time. NPS\u2019s deferred maintenance, also known as the maintenance backlog, was estimated for FY2016 at $11.332 billion. More than half of the NPS backlog is in transportation-related assets. Other federal land management agencies also have maintenance backlogs, but NPS\u2019s is the largest and has drawn the most congressional attention. \nDuring the past decade (FY2007-FY2016), NPS\u2019s maintenance backlog grew steadily before decreasing in FY2016. Overall, the deferred maintenance estimate grew by an estimated $1.718 billion in nominal dollars and $0.021 billion in inflation-adjusted dollars over the decade. Many factors might contribute to growth or reduction in deferred maintenance, including the aging of NPS assets, the availability of funding for NPS maintenance activities, acquisitions of new assets, agency management of the backlog, completion of individual projects, changes in construction and related costs, and changes in measurement and reporting methodologies. The backlog is distributed unevenly among states and territories, with California, the District of Columbia, and New York having the largest amounts of deferred maintenance. The amounts also vary among individual park units.\nSources of funding to address NPS deferred maintenance include discretionary appropriations, allocations from the Department of Transportation, park entrance and concessions fees, donations, and others. It is not possible to determine the total amount of funding from these sources that NPS has allocated each year to address deferred maintenance, because NPS does not aggregate these amounts in its budget reporting. \nNPS prioritizes its deferred maintenance projects based on the condition of assets and their importance to the parks\u2019 mission, as well as other criteria related to financial sustainability, resource protection, visitor use, and health and safety. NPS has taken a number of steps over the decade to improve its asset management systems and strategies. Some observers, including the Government Accountability Office (GAO), have recommended further improvements.\nSome Members of Congress and other stakeholders have proposed new sources of funding to address NPS\u2019s deferred maintenance needs. Bills in the 115th Congress to increase NPS funding for deferred maintenance\u2014including H.R. 2584, H.R. 2863, S. 751, and S. 1460\u2014would draw from mineral revenues currently going to the Treasury. Other proposed funding sources have included monies from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, income tax overpayments and contributions, new motorfuel taxes, and coin and postage stamp sales. \nOther stakeholders have suggested that NPS deferred maintenance could be reduced without additional funding\u2014for example, by improving the agency\u2019s capital investment strategies or increasing the role of nonfederal partners in park management. H.R. 1577 would require the Secretary of the Interior to evaluate NPS\u2019s Capital Investment Strategy and report on any recommended changes.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44924", "sha1": "37ec08569b64b83efbdfc6ff173473cb50fb005c", "filename": "files/20170823_R44924_37ec08569b64b83efbdfc6ff173473cb50fb005c.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44924_files&id=/0.png": "files/20170823_R44924_images_e9c1a331c708543677483abf857ab96caf771c4c.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44924", "sha1": "3d0842c37affe9fd314654c6392d14ec4a89f2ec", "filename": "files/20170823_R44924_3d0842c37affe9fd314654c6392d14ec4a89f2ec.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4841, "name": "Federal Land Management" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Appropriations", "Energy Policy" ] }