Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2027
- Sponsor
- Rep. Simpson, Michael K. [R-ID-2]
- Committees
- Appropriations Committee
- Last action
- Jun 5, 2026
Bottom line
The bill provides significant funding for federal environmental and land management agencies while simultaneously enacting numerous policy changes and restrictions on their regulatory authority, often reversing or prohibiting recent administrative actions.
What it actually does
This bill, H.R. 9171, is an appropriations measure for fiscal year 2027, allocating funds for the Department of the Interior, the Environmental Protection Agency, and various related agencies. Beyond funding, it includes numerous policy riders that impose restrictions on federal agencies regarding environmental regulations, land management, endangered species listings, and social policies. It also incorporates by reference three other House bills, enacting them into law.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that the bill provides essential funding for critical government functions, ensures fiscal responsibility, and includes necessary policy adjustments to reduce regulatory burdens, promote economic development, and restore local control over natural resources. They contend that the policy riders address overreach by federal agencies and protect industries and communities from burdensome regulations, while also streamlining processes and ensuring transparency.
Opponents contend
Opponents contend that the bill undercuts environmental protections, undermines scientific integrity, and imposes controversial social policies through the appropriations process, bypassing regular order. They argue that the numerous policy riders are detrimental to conservation efforts, public health, and the ability of agencies to fulfill their missions, and that they represent an abuse of the appropriations process to enact partisan policy changes.
The bill is extensive and highly complex due to its omnibus nature, numerous agency appropriations, and a significant number of detailed policy riders. An informed reader would require substantial time to fully understand its implications, likely more than typically afforded for public review of such a comprehensive measure.
Title I, Bureau of Land Management
Management of Lands and Resources Appropriation
This provision appropriates $1,212,095,000 for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the management of lands and resources, available until September 30, 2028. It specifies allocations for annual and deferred maintenance programs ($42,379,000) and the wild horse and burro program ($144,000,000), which remain available until expended. It also allows the use of BLM Permit Processing Improvement Fund fees for oil and gas application processing and sets limits for reception expenses.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue this funding is crucial for maintaining public lands, managing natural resources, and supporting the wild horse and burro program. They emphasize the importance of efficient permit processing for energy development on public lands, which contributes to national energy security and economic activity.
Critics contend
Opponents may argue that the funding for the wild horse and burro program is insufficient or misdirected, or that the emphasis on oil and gas permit processing undermines conservation efforts. Concerns might also be raised about the balance between resource extraction and environmental protection on BLM lands.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the need for land management and conservation with the demand for resource extraction and the challenges of managing wild animal populations on public lands.
Title I, United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Resource Management Appropriation
This provision allocates $1,362,899,000 to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for resource management, available until September 30, 2028. It includes specific limitations on funds for Endangered Species Act (ESA) activities, such as caps on spending for critical habitat designation and petitions for listing species, particularly for species listed before October 1, 2015, and non-indigenous species.
Title I, National Park Service
Operation of the National Park System Appropriation
This provision appropriates $2,874,162,000 for the National Park Service (NPS) to manage, operate, and maintain areas and facilities within the National Park System. It includes specific allocations for Everglades restoration planning ($11,661,000) and uses authorized by 54 U.S.C. 101122 ($15,000,000), with funds remaining available until September 30, 2028. It also allows for the use of funds from the National Park Medical Services Fund.
Title I, U.S. Wildland Fire Service
Wildland Fire Service Operations and Reserve Fund
This section appropriates $1,164,721,000 for the U.S. Wildland Fire Service (USWFS) for operations, with funds remaining available until expended. It includes $219,000,000 for fuels management and $10,000,000 for burned area rehabilitation. Additionally, it provides $387,157,000 for wildfire suppression operations and establishes a Wildfire Suppression Operation Reserve Fund of $380,000,000, which can be transferred to the USWFS or Forest Service for suppression when other funds are nearly exhausted.
Title I, Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education
Operation of Indian Programs and Education Construction
This section appropriates $2,269,716,000 for the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) for operation of Indian programs and $1,243,283,000 for the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) for education programs, available until September 30, 2028. It includes specific allocations for welfare assistance, housing improvement, and land acquisition. For BIE, $900,869,000 for school operations becomes available on June 1, 2027. Additionally, $304,678,000 is provided for education construction, repair, and maintenance, available until expended.
Title II, Environmental Protection Agency
State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG)
This provision appropriates $3,696,414,000 for State and Tribal Assistance Grants (STAG), available until expended. It includes major allocations for Clean Water State Revolving Funds ($1,192,296,000) and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds ($910,755,000). A significant portion of these funds ($525,486,678 for Clean Water and $506,395,022 for Drinking Water) is specifically for community project funding for water infrastructure. It also includes grants for brownfields, US-Mexico border water facilities, Alaska Native Villages, targeted airshed grants, and various other water quality and pollution control programs.
Title III, Forest Service
National Forest System Appropriation
This provision appropriates $1,876,907,000 for the National Forest System (NFS), available through September 30, 2030. It funds management, protection, improvement, and utilization of NFS lands, including hazardous fuels management. Specific allocations include $31,000,000 for the Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Fund and $185,000,000 for hazardous fuels management activities, with up to $30,000,000 for grants to incentivize biomass use. It also allows for credits to Grazing Associations for conservation practices.
Title III, Indian Health Service
Indian Health Services and Facilities Appropriations
This section appropriates $402,930,000 for Indian Health Services (IHS) for FY2027, with an additional $5,192,661,000 becoming available on October 1, 2027, and remaining available through September 30, 2029. It includes specific allocations for alcohol/drug treatment, Purchased/Referred Care ($1,055,713,000), the Indian Catastrophic Health Emergency Fund ($54,000,000), and the loan repayment program. For Indian Health Facilities, $354,474,000 is appropriated for FY2027, with an additional $871,074,000 becoming available on October 1, 2027, for construction, repair, and maintenance.
Sec. 116, Title I
Prohibition on Sage-Grouse Listing or Implementation
This section prohibits the Secretary of the Interior from using any funds made available by this or any other Act to write or issue a proposed or final rule regarding the greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) or any distinct population segment of greater sage-grouse under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. It also prohibits the implementation, administration, or enforcement of any threatened or endangered species status for the greater sage-grouse.
Sec. 122, Title I
Limitations on Prohibiting Lead Ammunition and Tackle
This section prohibits the use of funds to ban lead ammunition or tackle on federal land or water available for hunting or fishing, or to issue related regulations, unless specific conditions are met. These conditions include a determination by the Secretary of the Interior that a wildlife population decline is primarily caused by lead use, based on field data from the specific unit, and that the prohibition or regulation is consistent with or approved by the relevant state's fish and wildlife department.
Sec. 125, Title I
Reissuance of Gray Wolf Delisting Rule
This section mandates that the Secretary of the Interior 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)) within 60 days of the Act's enactment. Crucially, it states that this reissuance shall not be subject to judicial review.
Sec. 133, Title I
Funding Limitation Regarding BLM Conservation and Landscape Health Rule
This section prohibits the obligation or expenditure of any funds made available by this Act to implement or enforce the final rule from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) entitled "Conservation and Landscape Health" (89 Fed. Reg. 40308, May 9, 2024). This effectively blocks the implementation of a rule intended to elevate conservation as a use of public lands alongside traditional uses like grazing and energy development.
Sec. 145, Title I
Termination of Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation (ONHIR)
This section amends the Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act of 1974 to terminate the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation (ONHIR) effective September 30, 2026. Upon termination, the Secretary of the Interior is mandated to assume all remaining functions and responsibilities of ONHIR, including certified relocation applications, pending appeals, records management, beneficiary support services, and warranty/repair obligations for relocation homes. This aims to ensure a full discharge of ONHIR's duties.
Sec. 438, Title IV
Limitation on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Programs
This section prohibits the use of any funds made available by this Act to implement, administer, apply, enforce, or carry out any office, program, or activity for the purposes of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training or implementation.
Sec. 440, Title IV
Protection for Religious Beliefs on Marriage
This section prohibits the use of federal funds to take any discriminatory action against a person based on a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction that marriage is, or should be recognized as, a union of one man and one woman. Discriminatory actions include adverse tax treatment, denial of grants, contracts, scholarships, employment, or access to federal property or benefits. It also mandates that any person who would otherwise be accredited, licensed, or certified for federal purposes must be considered so, despite such a belief.
Sec. 442, Title IV
Prohibition on Using Social Cost of Carbon
This section prohibits the use of any funds made available by this Act to consider or incorporate the "social cost of carbon" in various federal processes. This includes cost-benefit analyses, rulemakings, guidance issuance, or any other agency action, specifically referencing Executive Orders 13990 and 14094 and related technical support documents. This effectively prevents federal agencies from using a key metric for valuing the economic damages of greenhouse gas emissions.
Sec. 443, Title IV
Incorporation by Reference of Three House Bills
This section enacts into law three specific House bills from the 119th Congress: H.R. 226 (Eastern Band of Cherokee Historic Lands Reacquisition Act), H.R. 1366 (Mining Regulatory Clarity Act), and H.R. 1276 (To remove restrictions from a parcel of land in Paducah, Kentucky), as each passed the House of Representatives. This means the full text of these bills becomes law as part of this appropriations act, without being reprinted within H.R. 9171.
Sec. 511, Title V
Redesignation of Apostle Islands National Lakeshore to National Park and Preserve
This section redesignates the Apostle Islands National Lakeshore as the "Apostle Islands National Park and Preserve," dividing it into an Apostle Islands National Park and an Apostle Islands National Preserve. It defines the boundaries for each new unit and specifies administration under National Park System laws. Crucially, it prohibits hunting and trapping within the National Park portion (except for tribal rights) but allows it within the National Preserve portion, consistent with prior administration. Fishing is permitted in both units.
The reissuance of the final rule removing the gray wolf from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife (85 Fed. Reg. 69778) shall not be subject to judicial review.
Sec. 125(b), Title I
Why it matters:This is a potentially evasive tactic to prevent legal challenges to a controversial delisting decision. By legislatively blocking judicial review, it bypasses a common avenue for environmental groups to contest such actions, ensuring the delisting stands regardless of its scientific or procedural merits.
Case for: Proponents argue that this ensures finality and prevents endless litigation that can tie up agency resources and delay management decisions, especially when a species is deemed recovered. They contend that Congress has the authority to make such policy decisions and limit judicial intervention.
Case against: Opponents argue that this provision undermines the rule of law and the checks and balances inherent in the Endangered Species Act. They contend that preventing judicial review removes a critical safeguard against arbitrary or politically motivated delisting decisions, potentially harming species conservation.
Estimated impact: This provision would immediately remove federal protections for gray wolves across much of the contiguous United States and prevent legal challenges to that decision, shifting management entirely to state agencies.
Prohibits federal agencies from taking discriminatory action against individuals or organizations based on a sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction that marriage is, or should be recognized as, a union of one man and one woman. This includes denying grants, contracts, employment, or accreditation, and mandates that such entities be considered accredited/licensed/certified for federal purposes.
Sec. 440, Title IV
Why it matters:This is a politically and socially contentious policy rider that would likely face significant opposition if introduced as standalone legislation. Placing it in a must-pass appropriations bill increases its chances of enactment by limiting debate and forcing a bundled vote.
Case for: Proponents argue this is a vital protection for religious freedom, ensuring that individuals and organizations are not penalized by the federal government for adhering to traditional religious or moral beliefs about marriage. They see it as preventing government overreach and protecting conscience rights.
Case against: Opponents argue this provision creates a broad license to discriminate against LGBTQ+ individuals and couples, undermining federal non-discrimination policies and civil rights. They contend it could allow entities receiving federal funds to deny services or employment based on sexual orientation or gender identity, contrary to principles of equality.
Estimated impact: This provision would significantly alter federal non-discrimination policies by creating a broad exemption for religious and moral beliefs regarding marriage, potentially impacting federal contracts, grants, employment, and services across numerous agencies.
Enacts three separate House bills (H.R. 226, H.R. 1366, H.R. 1276) into law by reference, meaning their full text becomes part of this Act without being explicitly printed within H.R. 9171.
Sec. 443, Title IV
Why it matters:This is a standard legislative practice for efficiency, especially with bills that have already passed one chamber. However, in an omnibus bill, it can also serve to bundle multiple policy changes, some potentially controversial, into a single vote, reducing individual scrutiny.
Case for: Proponents argue that this is an efficient way to enact legislation that has already been vetted and passed by one chamber, saving time and resources in the legislative process. It allows for the swift implementation of policies deemed important without reopening debate on each individual measure.
Case against: Opponents argue that this practice reduces transparency and makes it difficult for the public and even members of Congress to fully understand the legislation they are voting on. It can obscure the true scope and impact of an omnibus bill, as readers must consult multiple external documents.
Estimated impact: This provision enacts three distinct pieces of legislation covering tribal land, mining regulation, and federal land conveyance, each with its own specific impacts on affected groups and federal policy, without requiring them to pass as standalone bills through the entire legislative process.