Why It Matters

A recent Congressional Research Service report examines competing House and Senate proposals to revive the National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund, which stopped receiving new deposits after fiscal 2025. The Great American Outdoors Act established the fund to address deferred maintenance at the National Park Service, Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Indian Education. Those agencies had an estimated $46.2 billion in deferred maintenance in fiscal 2025.

The Trump administration’s budget request proposed reauthorizing the fund at $1.9 billion per year for five years. The original program provided up to $1.9 billion annually from fiscal 2021 through fiscal 2025. The House Appropriations Committee has also signaled that it may revise Interior appropriations language if reauthorization passes.

The Big Picture

H.R. 9250 and S. 1547 would both authorize deposits into the Legacy Restoration Fund from fiscal 2027 through fiscal 2031 while retaining the $1.9 billion annual cap and mandatory spending authority. Both bills would draw funding from increased National Park Service fees for foreign or nonresident visitors, receipts from licensing certain Interior Department intellectual property, and amounts tied to specified onshore energy revenues.

Both measures would retain the existing allocation formula, directing 70% of annual funding to the National Park Service, 15% to the Forest Service, and 5% each to the Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and Bureau of Indian Education. The bills would also require agencies other than BIE to achieve a “reasonable balance” between projects at higher- and lower-visitation units and solicit project suggestions from state governors.

The bills would require agencies to establish “clear, quantifiable, and standardized metrics” for calculating deferred maintenance across the covered agencies. Both would also direct agencies to use applicable categorical exclusions under the National Environmental Policy Act and other available procedures to expedite environmental review.

The measures differ in how they would calculate energy-related deposits. H.R. 9250 would base the amount on 50% of all specified onshore energy revenues, rather than limiting the calculation to revenues credited to the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. S. 1547 would base its calculation on onshore energy revenues credited as miscellaneous receipts. CRS notes that most onshore energy revenues are not credited that way, creating uncertainty over whether the Senate formula would generate enough revenue to reach the annual maximum.

S. 1547 would also allow agencies to enter into noncompetitive procurement contracts for Legacy Restoration Fund projects with certain entities considered uniquely positioned to perform the work, including state and local governments. H.R. 9250 does not contain that provision.

Both bills would reserve portions of funding for non-transportation projects at agencies other than BIE, although the percentages differ between the House and Senate versions. BIE funding would remain designated for schools.

The Bottom Line

The two proposals would restore up to $1.9 billion annually in mandatory funding for deferred maintenance from fiscal 2027 through fiscal 2031 while making changes to how projects are selected, funded, reviewed, and measured. Their most significant difference involves the treatment of onshore energy revenues, with H.R. 9250 drawing from a broader revenue base than S. 1547.

Oversight hearings have raised concerns about inconsistent and inaccurate deferred maintenance data across agencies. Both bills respond by requiring standardized metrics for calculating deferred maintenance, while also imposing additional project-selection and reporting requirements.

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article