[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 37 (Wednesday, February 25, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S675-S678]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE DECISION
Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following
decision from the Government Accountability Office be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Decision
Matter of: U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land
Management--Applicability of the Congressional Review Act
to the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument Record
of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan
File: B-337705
January 15, 2026
DIGEST
The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) issued the Grand Staircase-Escalante
National Monument Record of Decision and Approved Resource
Management Plan (Grand Staircase RMP). The Grand Staircase
RMP designates BLM-administered lands within the decision
area as available or unavailable for certain uses.
The Congressional Review Act (CRA) requires that before a
rule can take effect, an agency must submit the rule to both
the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as the
Comptroller General. CRA adopts the definition of rule under
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) but excludes certain
categories of rules from coverage. We conclude that the Grand
Staircase RMP meets APA's definition of a rule, and that no
CRA exception applies. Therefore, the Grand Staircase RMP is
a rule subject to CRA's submission requirements.
DECISION
On January 13, 2025, the U.S. Department of the Interior
(Interior), Bureau of Land Management (BLM) issued the Grand
Staircase-Escalante National Monument Record of Decision and
Approved Resource Management Plan (Grand Staircase RMP). We
received a request for a decision about whether the Grand
Staircase RMP is a rule for purposes of the Congressional
Review Act (CRA). As discussed below, we conclude that the
Grand Staircase RMP is a rule for purposes of CRA.
Our practice when issuing decisions is to obtain the legal
views of the relevant agency on the subject of the request.
Accordingly, we reached out to Interior to obtain the
agency's views. We received Interior's response on September
18, 2025.
BACKGROUND
BLM Public Land Management
Under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976,
as amended (FLPMA), BLM is responsible for developing,
maintaining, and, when appropriate, revising ``land use plans
which provide by tracts or areas for the use of the public
lands.'' BLM land use plans, referred to as ``resource
management plans'' (RMPs), establish goals and objectives to
guide future land and resource management actions implemented
by BLM. Pursuant to FLPMA, BLM established procedures for the
development, revision, and amendment of RMPs.
The objective of resource management planning is to
maximize resource values for the public through a rational,
consistently applied set of regulations and procedures which
promote the concept of multiple use management. An RMP
generally establishes land use designations; allowable
resource uses; resource conditions, goals, and objectives;
program constraints and general management practices; areas
to be covered by more specific plans; and other related
information.
BLM may amend an RMP to account for, among other things,
new data, new or revised policy, or a change in
circumstances. Amendments are to be made through an
environmental assessment of the proposed change or an
environmental impact statement, if needed, and must involve
public involvement and interagency coordination.
[[Page S676]]
The Antiquities Act of 1906
The Antiquities Act of 1906 grants the President authority
to designate nationa1 monuments on federal lands that contain
historic landmarks, structures, or other objects of historic
or scientific interest. The President may also reserve
parcels of land as part of the national monuments, but the
statute mandates that such reservations be confined to the
smallest area compatible with the proper care and management
of the protected objects. Proclamations under the Act are
self-executing and do not require further action by Congress.
Both Congress and the President have designated monuments to
be overseen by federal land agencies including, for example,
the National Park Service and BLM.
Grand Staircase-Escalante Resource Management Plan
BLM issued the Grand Staircase RMP to establish a
management plan consistent with Presidential Proclamation
10286 (Proclamation 10286). Proclamation 10286 restored the
boundaries of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument
(GSENM) to its pre-December 4, 2017, boundaries. Proclamation
10286 also directed BLM to manage the lands for the specific
purpose of protecting and restoring objects identified in
Proclamation 10286 and Proclamation No. 6920, 61 Fed. Reg.
50419 (Sept. 26, 1996) (Proclamation 6920). Proclamation
10286 incorporated Proclamation 6920 by reference.
Proclamations 6920 and 10286 (collectively, Proclamations)
provide that BLM shall develop a management plan for the
GSENM in accordance with the Proclamations, FLPMA, and other
applicable laws.
BLM initiated development of the Grand Staircase RMP in
July of 2022 and completed the process with the issuance of
the Grand Staircase RMP on January 13, 2025. The Grand
Staircase RMP encompasses 1.87 million acres of public land
managed by BLM. It delineates goals, objectives, and
management direction intended to ensure consistency with the
protection of monument objects and the direction provided in
the Proclamations.
For example, the Grand Staircase RMP establishes a zonal
system that assigns different levels of protection and
access, including for example more than 1.2 million acres of
``primitive area'' closed to off-highway vehicle use. The RMP
also designates areas for particular uses, limits camping to
a set number of days, identifies specific pastures as
unavailable for grazing or open only for trailing,
distinguishes recreational shooting from game hunting, adds
explicit protections for old-growth trees, and institutes
protection measures for migratory birds. To protect sensitive
resources, the Grand Staircase RMP creates new Areas of
Critical Environmental Concern.
Some measures within the Grand Staircase RMP are directly
mandated by Proclamation 10286. For instance, the RMP
implements the withdrawal of all federal lands within the
decision area from mineral and geothermal leasing, as
directed by Proclamation 10286. Additionally, the RMP
reflects Proclamation 10286's instruction that lands covered
by voluntarily relinquished grazing permits or leases will be
retired from livestock grazing. And it preserves tribal
members access to sites and resources for customary usage.
Finally, the Grand Staircase RMP affirms that management
actions based on Proclamation 10286 are subject to valid
existing rights and that all actions within the GSENM will be
consistent with the protection of GSENM objects.
Congressional Review Act
CRA, enacted in 1996 to strengthen congressional oversight
of agency rulemaking, requires federal agencies to submit a
report on each new rule to both houses of Congress and to the
Comptroller General for review before a rule can take effect.
The report must contain a copy of the rule, ``a concise
general statement relating to the rule,'' and the rule's
proposed effective date. CRA allows Congress to review and
disapprove rules issued by federal agencies for a period of
60 days using special procedures. If a resolution of
disapproval is enacted, then the new rule has no force or
effect.
CRA adopts the definition of a rule under the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which states that a rule
is ``the whole or a part of an agency statement of general or
particular applicability and future effect designed to
implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy or
describing the organization, procedure, or practice
requirements of an agency.'' However, CRA excludes three
categories of rules from coverage: (1) rules of particular
applicability; (2) rules relating to agency management or
personnel; and (3) rules of agency organization, procedure,
or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or
obligations of non-agency parties.
Interior did not submit a CRA report to Congress or The
Comptroller general on the Grand Staircase RMP. In its
response to us, Interior provided additional information
about RMP procedures related to the release of the Grand
Staircase RMP. Interior noted that it followed the notice and
public comment procedures for RMPs in accordance with FLPMA
and its regulations. However, Interior did not state a
position as to whether the Grand Staircase RMP is a rule
under CRA.
DISCUSSION
At issue here is whether the Grand Staircase RMP meets
CRA's definition of a rule, which adopts APA's definition of
a rule, with three exceptions. As explained below, we
conclude that it does and that no exceptions apply.
Consequently, the Grand Staircase RMP is subject to review
under CRA.
The Grand Staircase RMP is a Rule under APA
Applying APA's definition of a rule, the Grand Staircase
RMP meets all of the required elements. First, the Grand
Staircase RMP is an agency statement as it was issued by BLM,
a federal agency. However, because the RMP was issued in
response to a presidential proclamation under the Antiquities
Act of 1906, we must assess whether the RMP represents an
agency statement or a presidential action. The President is
not an agency for purposes of APA, accordingly presidential
actions are not rules under APA. Thus, we have distinguished
between an agency acting under its own statutory authority,
which would constitute an agency statement, and an agency
acting under authority delegated by the President, which
constitutes a presidential action.
For example, in B-333725, Mar. 17, 2022, we considered
whether guidance issued by a presidential task force and
approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
constituted a rule under CRA. Pertinent here, we examined
whether OMB's approval of the guidance was taken under the
President's sole authority or the authority vested in the
agency. There, the Federal Property and Administrative
Services Act (the Property Act) vested the President, not any
agency, with the authority to prescribe the policies and
directives the President considered necessary to carry out
the statute's purposes. The President subsequently delegated
this authority to OMB. a OMB's involvement therefore existed
solely by virtue of that presidential delegation. Because the
President is not an ``agency'' under the APA, we concluded
that when an agency acts solely pursuant to authority vested
exclusively in the President--effectively standing in the
President's shoes--the resulting action is attributable to
the President rather than to the agency.
By contrast, in B-336512, Aug. 29, 2024, we concluded that
an OMB Controller Alert suggesting that agencies identify
projects funded by statutes enacted pursuant to initiatives
of the Biden Administration constituted an agency statement
because it was issued pursuant to OMB's statutory authority
to issue such guidance, rather than under authority delegated
by the President.
The crux of our analysis here lies in whether BLM was
merely a conduit for the President's Antiquities Act
authority or whether it exercised its own independent
authority under FLPMA. As explained further below, we
conclude that the Grand Staircase RMP operates as a hybrid
regulatory instrument, reflecting both the implementation of
the Proclamations directives and BLM's independent exercise
of its discretion and authority under FLPMA.
The Antiquites Act vests the President with the authority
to declare certain landmarks, structures, and objects as
national monuments and to reserve parcels of land as part of
the national monuments. In certain respects, the Grand
Staircase RMP affirms the Proclamations' directives and
implements measures to protect the GSENM. The Grand Staircase
RMP provisions that acknowledge GSENM and specify its
boundaries simply reflect the legal status of the land as
established by the President under the Antiquities Act. Some
directives of the Proclamations also include the
administration's policy for the protection of the GSENM and
other policy interest. For example, the withdrawal of GSENM
from disposition under mineral and geothermal leasing laws,
recognition of valid existing rights, the provision of access
to tribal members for customary uses, and adoption of a
mandatory policy on grazing permit relinquishment.
However, BLM's implementation of the Proclamations' policy
directives and other discretionary provisions were developed
under BLM's independent authority to manage public lands and
resources under FLPMA. More specifically, BLM prepared the
Grand Staircase RMP pursuant to Interior's land-use planning
regulations implementing FLPMA, codified at 43 C.F.R. part
1600. In developing the Grand Staircase RMP, BLM proposed
five alternatives, Alternatives A-E, for the protection of
the GSENM and the management of federal land and resources
within the decision area. The development of management
alternatives, and the selection of an alternative, is the
hallmark of BLM's discretion under FLPMA. BLM selected its
Proposed RMP, Alternate E, which builds on Alternative C and
incorporates its assessment of the best available scientific
information, public comments, cooperating-agency input,
government-to-government consultation, and elements of other
alternatives. Accordingly, BLM exercised its independent
authority and discretion in choosing Alternative E, as the
best alternative to manage land use and resources within the
decision area.
As noted above, the Antiquities Act grants the President
authority to identify objects of historic or scientific
interest and to reserve the smallest area of land necessary
for their protection. By its plain terms this authority,
while exclusive to the President, is narrow in scope. It does
not encompass the development of land-use plans, or the
allocation of resources on public land. Congress assigned
those responsibilities to the Secretary of the Interior and
BLM under FLPMA. The Grand Staircase RMP explains that
Alternative E
[[Page S677]]
designates management areas primarily as a tool for managing
visitation and allowable uses, while also ensuring protection
of GSENM objects. Whereas the President through Proclamations
was empowered to establish the GSENM and its boundaries under
the Antiquites Act. Because the Grand Staircase RMP relies on
a separate statutory grant of authority, FLPMA, rather than
delegation of the President's statutory authority under the
Antiquities Act, BLM was not ``standing in the President's
shoes'' when it developed a land use plan for the GSENM.
Although the proclamation directs the Secretary and BLM to
provide for the care and management of the monument, such
directives do not expand the President's statutory authority
under the Antiquies Act or displace BLM's obligations under
FLPMA. Unlike the case in B-333725, where OMB acted solely
under the authority delegated by the President under the
Property Act, the legal authority to manage federal land
and resources is vested in BLM.
The Grand Staircase RMP's affirmation of the GSENM's legal
status, and its initiation pursuant to the Proclamations,
does not render the RMP a presidential action. To conclude
otherwise would create a loophole for ``hybrid'' actions by
insulating significant regulatory actions from legislative
oversight under CRA. The Grand Staircase RMP reflects the
agency's determination of how it will exercise its
independent authority and discretion under its statutory
mandate to develop land use plans for public lands and the
government's mineral estate. Because the GSENM's legal status
exists independently of the Grand Staircase RMP, provisions
that affirm the Proclamations do not change the RMP's
fundamental character--an agency level administrative action.
Accordingly, the Grand Staircase RMP constitutes an agency
statement for purposes of the APA.
Second, returning to the three elements of the definition,
the Grand Staircase RMP is a rule of future effect because it
is designed to apply prospectively to guide all subsequent
management decisions and it implements and directs the long-
term allocation of public land for certain uses, establishes
permissible resource uses, and defines the conditions and
constraints necessary to achieve the specific goals and
objectives outlined within the RMP. The management decisions
made in the Grand Staircase RMP became effective January 6,
2025, when the Record of Decision was signed. As of that
date, the Grand Staircase RMP establishes a framework upon
which further decisions will be made. Therefore, the Grand
Staircase RMP has future effect.
Finally, the Grand Staircase RMP implements, interprets, or
prescribes law or policy, because it implements a management
plan as directed by and in accordance with the Proclamations.
We have recognized that `` `a statement by an agency that
simply restates an established interpretation `tread[s] no
new ground' and `le[aves] the world just as it found it, and
thus cannot be fairly described as implementing,
interpreting, or prescribing law or policy.' '' However,
while the RMP restates certain provisions in Proclamation
10286, it also establishes management policies pursuant to
BLM's authority under FLPMA that were not included in the
Proclamation. Additionally, the RMP establishes conditions on
land use, allocates resources for specific purposes, and
prohibits certain activities pursuant to BLM's authority
under FLPMA.
Our conclusion here is consistent with our previous
decisions finding similar land use plans and RMPs implement,
interpret, or prescribe law or policy. Accordingly, the Grand
Staircase RMP satisfies the third element of the APA
definition of ``rule.'' Having met all required elements, the
Grand Staircase RMP constitutes a rule under APA.
CRA Exceptions
We must next determine whether any of CRA's three
exceptions apply. CRA provides for three types of rules that
are not subject to its requirements: (1) rules of particular
applicability; (2) rules relating to agency management or
personnel; and (3) rules of agency organization, procedure,
or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or
obligations of non-agency parties.
(1) Rule of Particular Applicability
Consistent with our previous decisions, the Grand Staircase
RMP is a rule of general applicability, rather than
particular applicability. For example, in B-337163, June 25,
2025, BLM issued the Miles City Resource Management Plan
Amendment (RMPA) that established land use designations to
govern all coal mining activities by any person or entity
within the planning area of its Miles City Field Office.
Because the Miles City RMPA governed all coal mining
activities by any person within its purview, we concluded
that the Miles City RMPA was a rule of general applicability.
Similarly, the Grand Staircase RMP establishes land use
designations, forecloses certain activities, allocates
resources, and imposes conditions upon land use that are
applicable to any person or entity within the GSENM, making
it a rule of general applicability.
(2) Rule of Agency Management or Personnel
The Grand Staircase RMP is not a rule of agency management
or personnel. We have previously found that rules that fall
into this category relate to purely internal agency matters.
Because the Grand Staircase RMP primarily focuses on how the
public may use resources and public land rather than BLM's
internal management or its personnel, the RMP does not meet
CRA's second exception.
(3) Rule of Agency Organization, Procedure, or Practice
That Does Not Substantially Affect Non-Agency Parties
Lastly, the Grand Staircase RMP is not a rule of agency
organization, procedure, or practice that does not
substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency
parties.
We have previously explained that this exception was
modeled on the APA exception to notice-and-comment rulemaking
requirements for ``rules of agency organization, procedure,
or practice.'' The purpose of the APA exception is to ensure
``that agencies retain latitude in organizing their internal
operations,'' so long as such rules do not have a substantial
impact on non-agency parties.
Following this principle in the CRA context, we have only
applied CRA's third exception to rules that primarily focus
on the internal operations of an agency. For instance, in B-
329926, Sept. 10, 2018, we found that updates to a Social
Security Administration (SSA) hearing manual governing SSA
adjudicators' use of information from the internet qualified
as a rule of agency organization, procedure, or practice.
There, the manual outlined procedures for SSA employees to
follow in processing and adjudicating benefits claims.
Because the manual was directed to and binding only on SSA
officials without imposing new burdens on claimants, we
concluded that the manual met CRA's third exception.
In contrast, rules that are directed at and primarily
concerned with the behavior of non-agency parties do not fall
within this category. a Thus, in B-337163, June 25, 2025, we
declined to apply CRA's third exception to BLM's Miles City
RMPA, because it was not limited to changes in BLM's internal
operations. Instead, the Miles City RMPA was directed at non-
agency parties as it foreclosed these parties from leasing
coal within designated areas of the decision area. Similarly,
in B-337200, June 25, 2025, we declined to apply CRA's third
exception to the Central Yukon RMP because the plan primarily
regulated the conduct of non-agency parties by foreclosing
certain actions through the establishment of land use
designations and the delineation of the activities that may
be undertaken in the decision area.
Here, the Grand Staircase RMP includes some procedural
changes, such as the new requirement for personnel to utilize
a revised drought index when determining whether to implement
grazing reductions. However, like the Miles City RMPA and the
Central Yukon RMP, the Grand Staircase RMP is not primarily
focused on making changes to internal agency operations.
Instead, the Grand Staircase RMP is directed at, and concerns
itself primarily with the preservation of the GSENM by
delineating the use of public land and resources by non-
agency parties within the decision area. Therefore, the Grand
Staircase RMP does not qualify as a rule of agency
organization, procedure, or practice.
We must also consider whether the Grand Staircase RMP
substantially affects the rights or obligations of non-agency
parties. When analyzing this aspect of CRA's third exception,
``the critical question is whether the agency action alters
the rights or interests of the regulated entities.'' Along
similar lines, courts have determined that``[a]n agency rule
that modifies substantive rights and interests can only be
nominally procedural, and the exemption for such rules of
agency procedure cannot apply.'' In previous decisions, we
have concluded that where an RMP designates use by non-agency
parties in the areas it governs, it has a substantial effect.
For instance, in B-337163, June 25, 2025, we explained that
the Miles City RMPA altered substantive rights and
obligations of non-agency parties by excluding 1,745,040
acres of BLM-administered land from coal leasing, effectively
precluding these parties from pursuing coal leases within the
Miles City planning area. Similarly, in B-337200, June 25,
2025, we concluded that the Central Yukon RMP substantially
affected non-agency parties by imposing, among other things,
land use restrictions, such as designating areas of critical
environmental concern and closing certain tracts of land for
mineral extraction and recreational use.
Consistent with our prior decisions concerning other RMPs,
the Grand Staircase RMP has a substantial effect on non-
agency parties. The Grand Staircase RMP substantially affects
the rights and obligations of non-agency parties by, for
example, designating specific grazing pastures, e.g., Circle
Cliffs, Upper Paria, as ``unavailable'' or ``trailing-only'',
and closing approximately 1.2 million acres (classified as a
Primitive Zone) to off-highway vehicle use. Furthermore, the
RMP imposes time limitations for camping, restricts or closes
areas to recreational shooting, and provides direction
regarding access for mineral exploration and timber
harvesting. Accordingly, the Grand Staircase RMP fails to
meet CRA's third exception.
CONCLUSION
The Grand Staircase RMP is a rule for purposes of CRA
because it meets the definition of a rule under APA and no
CRA exception applies. Therefore, the Grand Staircase RMP is
subject to CRA's requirement that it be submitted to Congress
and the Comptroller General before it can take effect.
Edda Emmanuelli Perez,
General Counsel.
[[Page S678]]
____________________