[House Report 105-612]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
105th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 105-612
_______________________________________________________________________
NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM NEW AREA STUDIES ACT
_______
July 14, 1998.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1728]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 1728) to provide for the development of a plan and a
management review of the National Park System and to reform the
process by which areas are considered for addition to the
National Park System, and for other purposes, having considered
the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and
recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu
thereof the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``National Park System New Area Studies
Act''.
SEC. 2. STUDY OF NEW PARK SYSTEM AREAS.
Section 8 of Public Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-5; popularly known as
the National Park System General Authorities Act) is amended as
follows:
(1) By inserting ``General Authority.--'' after ``(a)''.
(2) By striking the second through the seventh sentences of
subsection (a).
(3) By designating the last two sentences of subsection (a)
as subsection (e) and inserting in the first of such sentences
before the words ``For the purposes of carrying'' the
following: ``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--''.
(4) By inserting the following after subsection (a):
``(b) Studies of Areas for Potential Addition.--(1) At the beginning
of each calendar year, along with the annual budget submission, the
Secretary of the Interior shall submit to the Committee on Resources of
the House of Representatives and to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the United States Senate a list of areas recommended for
study for potential inclusion in the National Park System.
``(2) In developing the list to be submitted under this subsection,
the Secretary shall give consideration to those areas that have the
greatest potential to meet the established criteria of national
significance, suitability, and feasibility. The Secretary shall give
special consideration to themes, sites, and resources not already
adequately represented in the National Park System.
``(3) No study of the potential of an area for inclusion in the
National Park System may be initiated after the date of enactment of
this subsection, except as provided by specific authorization of an Act
of Congress.
``(4) Nothing in this Act shall limit the authority of the National
Park Service to conduct preliminary resource assessments, gather data
on potential study areas, provide technical and planning assistance,
prepare or process nominations for administrative designations, update
previous studies, or complete reconnaissance surveys of individual
areas requiring a total expenditure of less than $25,000.
``(5) Nothing in this section shall be construed to apply to or to
affect or alter the study of any river segment for potential addition
to the national wild and scenic rivers system or to apply to or to
affect or alter the study of any trail for potential addition to the
national trails system.
``(c) Report.--(1) The Secretary of the Interior shall complete the
study for each area for potential inclusion in the National Park System
within 3 complete fiscal years following the date of enactment of
specific legislation providing for the study of such area. Each study
under this section shall be prepared with appropriate opportunity for
public involvement, including at least one public meeting in the
vicinity of the area under study, and after reasonable efforts to
notify potentially affected landowners and State and local governments.
``(2) In conducting the study, the Secretary shall consider whether
the area under study--
``(A) possesses nationally significant natural or cultural
resources and represents one of the most important examples of
a particular resource type in the country; and
``(B) is a suitable and feasible addition to the system.
``(3) Each study--
``(A) shall consider the following factors with regard to the
area being studied--
``(i) the rarity and integrity of the resources;
``(ii) the threats to those resources;
``(iii) similar resources are already protected in
the National Park System or in other public or private
ownership;
``(iv) the public use potential;
``(v) the interpretive and educational potential;
``(vi) costs associated with acquisition, development
and operation;
``(vii) the socioeconomic impacts of any designation;
``(viii) the level of local and general public
support, and
``(ix) whether the area is of appropriate
configuration to ensure long-term resource protection
and visitor use;
``(B) shall consider whether direct National Park Service
management or alternative protection by other public agencies
or the private sector is appropriate for the area;
``(C) shall identify what alternative or combination of
alternatives would in the professional judgment of the Director
of the National Park Service be most effective and efficient in
protecting significant resources and providing for public
enjoyment; and
``(D) may include any other information which the Secretary
deems to be relevant.
``(4) Each study shall be completed in compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
``(5) The letter transmitting each completed study to Congress shall
contain a recommendation regarding the Secretary's preferred management
option for the area.
``(d) List of Areas.--At the beginning of each calendar year, along
with the annual budget submission, the Secretary of the Interior shall
submit to the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives
and to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the United
States Senate a list of areas which have been previously studied which
contain primarily historical resources, and a list of areas which have
been previously studied which contain primarily natural resources, in
numerical order of priority for addition to the National Park System.
In developing the lists, the Secretary should consider threats to
resource values, cost escalation factors, and other factors listed in
subsection (c) of this section. The Secretary should only include on
the lists areas for which the supporting data is current and
accurate.''.
(5) By adding at the end of subsection (e) (as designated by
paragraph (3) of this section) the following: ``For carrying
out subsections (b) through (d) there are authorized to be
appropriated $2,000,000.''.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of H.R. 1728 (as introduced) is to provide for
the development of a plan and a management review of the
National Park System and to reform the process by which areas
are considered for addition to the National Park System.
Background and Need for Legislation
The National Park Service is charged with the stewardship
of many of the nation's precious natural and historical
resources. The 376 units which currently make up the National
Park System are a diverse collection of parks, historic sites,
memorials, monuments, seashores, battlefields, parkways and
trails. These areas are known throughout the world for their
scenic beauty and historical significance. H.R. 1728 aims
toward maintaining the integrity of the National Park System
through various improvements to the process of planning and
establishing units of the National Park System.
The National Park Service has been directed by Congress (16
U.S.C. 1a-5) to study and monitor areas to determine if they
are nationally significant and whether they have potential for
inclusion in the National Park System. To be eligible for
favorable consideration as a unit of the National Park System,
an area must: (1) possess nationally significant natural or
historical resources; (2) be a suitable and feasible addition
to the system; and (3) require direct National Park Service
management instead of alternative protection by other agencies
or the private sector. These criteria are designed to ensure
that the National Park System includes only the most
outstanding examples of the nation's heritage. After the
National Park Service studies a potential new area, its study
is forwarded to Congress.
The Committee believes reforms are needed to this process.
Congress relies heavily on National Park Service studies to
make evaluations about the significant of an area and its
suitability for designation as a National Park Service unit.
Between 1976 and 1981 the National Park Service had a program
of identifying high priority candidates for study. This program
was terminated in 1981, and until recent years, the National
Park Service has not had legislative direction to recommend
potential new parks. In the absence of initiatives coming from
the National Park Service, Congress directed numerous studies
of specific areas both in authorizing legislation and in
appropriations of funds earmarked for particular units.
Several problems exist with the current new area study
process. First, there are three separate sources for new area
studies: the National Park Service itself, the authorizing
committees and the appropriations committees. There is no
agreed-upon process for ranking the priority of these studies,
nor is there adequate funding to complete all of them. Because
studies usually require two to three years, some studies are
delayed indefinitely or are started then stopped in midstream
because all available funding in a particular fiscal year is
earmarked for other studies. Second, the quality of the studies
also varies widely, as does the level of review and scrutiny by
the Washington, D.C., office of the National Park Service. It
has been too easy for political considerations to be injected
into the study process, and recommendations of professional
planners are sometimes changed for political reasons. Third, is
that some studies come to Congress without any preferred
action, which can lead to confusion regarding the
Administration's position on a particular area. New area
legislation may be introduced on the basis of an ambiguous
study, when in fact the resource involved might not meet the
criteria for designation. H.R. 1728 would remedy all these
problems.
Lastly, it was the intent of the Congress that the
appropriation of $2,000,000 authorized for carrying out these
activities would be on an annual basis.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short Title
The bill may be cited as ``The National Park System New
Area Studies Act.''
Section 2. Study of New Park System Areas
H.R. 1728 amends the Act of August 18, 1970 (commonly known
as the General Authorities Act) to make a number of reforms to
the new areas study process.
The bill provides that at the beginning of each calendar
year, along with the annual budget submission, the Secretary
will submit to Congress a list of any areas recommended for
study with potential to meet the established criteria of
national significance, suitability and feasibility. The
Secretary shall give specific consideration to themes, sites
and resources not already adequately represented in the
National Park System as identified in the National Park System
Plan.
The bill requires that all new area studies be specifically
authorized by Congress. The Committee notes that this
prohibition does not apply to the authority of the National
Park Service to conduct preliminary resource assessments,
gather data on potential study sites, provide technical and
planning assistance, process nominations for administrative
designations, update previous studies or complete
reconnaissance surveys of individual sites requiring a total
expenditure of less than $25,000. The Committee also noted that
this provision does not effect the study authority contained in
the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, the National Trails System Act
or the Wilderness Act. Upon authorization, studies would be
completed in three years and would have to contain the
management alternative preferred by the National Park Service.
The section also specifies the national significance,
suitability and feasibility criteria and other factors which
the study must consider.
Each study shall identify what alternative or combination
of alternatives would, in the professional judgement of the
National Park Service, be most effective and efficient in
protecting significant resources and providing for public
enjoyment. The letter transmitting each study to Congress shall
contain a recommendation regarding the Administration's
preferred management option for the area. The Committee expects
these studies to reflect the highest possible professional
standards and provide a clear recommendation to Congress. If an
area fails to meet established criteria, the study should
clearly state this finding. The purpose of these reforms is
toprovide Congress with the professional opinion of the National Park
Service earlier in the process of considering areas for addition to the
Park System.
The bill also requires the Secretary of the Interior to
annually submit a prioritized list of areas previously studied
for addition to the National Park System. The National Park
Service will submit two priority rankings, one for areas which
contain primarily historical resources and one for areas which
contain primarily natural resources.
Committee Action
H.R. 1728 was introduced on May 22, 1997, by Congressman
Joel Hefley (R-CO). H.R. 1728 was referred to the Committee on
Resources, and within the Committee, to the Subcommittee on
National Parks and Public Lands. On February 24, 1998, the
Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 1728 where Maureen
Finnerty, Associate Director for Park Operations and Education
of the National Park Service, testified in favor of the measure
with some minor clarifications. On June 11, 1998, the
Subcommittee met to consider H.R. 1728. Congressman Hefley
offered several amendments en bloc to address the concerns of
the Administration. The amendments were adopted by voice vote.
The bill, as amended, was then ordered reported by voice vote
to the Full Committee. On June 17, 1998, the Full Committee met
to consider the bill. No further amendments were offered and
the bill, as amended, was ordered favorably reported to the
House of Representatives by voice vote.
Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations
With respect to the requirements of clause 2(l)(3) of rule
XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and clause
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
the Committee on Resources' oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Article I, section 8, and Article IV, section 3 of the
Constitution of the United States grant Congress the authority
to enact H.R. 1728.
Cost of the Legislation
Clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the
Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out
H.R. 1728. However, clause 7(d) of that rule provides that this
requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in
its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office
under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
Compliance With House Rule XI
1. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(B) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, H.R.
1728 does not contain any new budget authority, spending
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in
revenues or tax expenditures.
2. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(D) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and
Oversight on the subject of H.R. 1728.
3. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(C) of
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R.
1728 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, July 1, 1998.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1728, the National
Park System New Area Studies Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Deborah Reis.
Sincerely,
Paul Van de Water
(For June E. O'Neill, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 1728--National Park System New Area Studies Act
Summary: Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts,
CBO estimates that the federal government would spend an
additional $2 million annually under H.R. 1728 to study new
areas for potential inclusion in the National Park System. The
bill would not affect direct spending or receipts; therefore,
pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply. The bill contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would not affect the
budgets of state, local, or tribal governments.
H.R. 1728 would establish a statutory process for reviewing
new areas as potential additions to the National Park System.
The changes made by the bill to laws governing the National
Park Service (NPS) would codify practices already adopted by
the agency for conducting such reviews. Under these procedures,
the NPS would include within its annual budget request a list
of areas that the agency recommends for study as possible new
park units. Once the NPS receives authority for a study, it
would have three years to complete a final report on the area.
H.R. 1728 would authorize appropriations of $2 million annually
for carrying out the studies under the new procedures (in
addition to an existing authorization of appropriations for
conducting new area studies of $1 million a year).
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: Based on
information provided by the NPS and assuming appropriation of
all amounts authorized for new area studies, CBO estimates that
the NPS would spend $3 million annually to carry out the
procedures mandated by H.R. 1728--$2 million more per year than
under current law. Total additional spending over the 1999-2003
period would be $10 million. The estimated budgetary impact of
H.R. 1728 is shown in the following table. The costs of this
legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural resources
and environment).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal years, in millions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Spending Under Current Law:
Authorization Level \1\..................................... 1 1 1 1 1 1
Estimated Outlays........................................... 1 1 1 1 1 1
Proposed Changes:
Authorization Level......................................... 0 2 2 2 2 2
Estimated Outlays........................................... 0 2 2 2 2 2
Spending Under H.R. 1728:
Authorization \1\........................................... 1 3 3 3 3 3
Estimated Outlays........................................... 1 3 3 3 3 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1998 level is the amount appropriated for that year. The levels shown in each of the outyears are the
amounts authorized under current law.
Basis of estimate: For the purpose of this estimate, CBO
assumes that H.R. 1728 will be enacted before the beginning of
fiscal year 1999 and that all amounts authorized (by both the
bill and existing law) for new area studies would be
appropriated for each fiscal year. Estimated outlays are based
on historical spending patterns for this activity.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 1728
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would not affect the budgets of state,
local, or tribal governments.
Estimate prepared by: Deborah Reis.
Estimate approved by: Paul N. Van de Water, Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Compliance With Public Law 104-4
H.R. 1728 contains no unfunded mandates.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed
to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is
printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed
is shown in roman):
ACT OF AUGUST 18, 1970
(POPULARLY KNOWN AS THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM GENERAL AUTHORITIES ACT)
AN ACT To improve the administration of the national park system by the
Secretary of the Interior, and to clarify the authorities applicable to
the system, and for other purposes
* * * * * * *
Sec. 8. (a) General Authority.--The Secretary of the Interior
is directed to investigate, study, and continually monitor the
welfare of areas whose resources exhibit qualities of national
significance and which may have potential for inclusion in the
National Park System. [At the beginning of each fiscal year,
the Secretary shall transmit to the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and to the President of the Senate,
comprehensive reports on each of those areas upon which studies
have been completed. Each such report shall indicate and
elaborate on the theme(s) which the area represents as
indicated in the National Park System Plan. On this same date,
and accompanying such reports, the Secretary shall transmit a
listing, in generally descending order of importance or merit,
of not less than twelve such areas which appear to be of
national significance and which may have potential for
inclusion in the National Park System. Threats to resource
values, and cost escalation factors shall be considered in
listing the order of importance or merit. Such listing may be
comprised of any areas heretofore submitted under terms of this
section, and which at the time of listing are not included in
the National Park System. Accompanying the annual listing of
areas shall be a synopsis, for each report previously
submitted, of the current and changed condition of the resource
integrity of the area and other relevant factors, compiled as a
result of continual periodic monitoring and embracing the
period since the previous such submission or initial report
submission one year earlier.] The Secretary is also directed to
transmit annually to the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and to the President of the Senate, at the
beginning of each fiscal year, a complete and current list of
all areas included on the Registry of Natural Landmarks and
those areas of national significance listed on the National
Register of Historic places which areas exhibit known or
anticipated damage or threats to the integrity of their
resources, along with notations as to the nature and severity
of such damage or threats. Each report and annual listing shall
be printed as a House document: Provided, That should adequate
supplies of previously printed identical reports remain
available, newly submitted identical reports shall be omitted
from printing upon the receipt by the Speaker of the United
States House of Representatives of a joint letter from the
chairman of the Committee on Natural Resources of the United
States House of Representatives and the chairman of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the United States
Senate indicating such to be the case. [For the purposes of
carrying out the studies for potential new Park System units
and for monitoring the welfare of those resources, there are
authorized to be appropriated annually not to exceed
$1,000,000. For the purposes of monitoring the welfare and
integrity of the national landmarks, there are authorized to be
appropriated annually not to exceed $1,500,000.]
(b) Studies of Areas for Potential Addition.--(1) At the
beginning of each calendar year, along with the annual budget
submission, the Secretary of the Interior shall submit to the
Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives and to
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the United
States Senate a list of areas recommended for study for
potential inclusion in the National Park System.
(2) In developing the list to be submitted under this
subsection, the Secretary shall give consideration to those
areas that have the greatest potential to meet the established
criteria of national significance, suitability, and
feasibility. The Secretary shall give special consideration to
themes, sites, and resources not already adequately represented
in the National Park System.
(3) No study of the potential of an area for inclusion in the
National Park System may be initiated after the date of
enactment of this subsection, except as provided by specific
authorization of an Act of Congress.
(4) Nothing in this Act shall limit the authority of the
National Park Service to conduct preliminary resource
assessments, gather data on potential study areas, provide
technical and planning assistance, prepare or process
nominations for administrative designations, update previous
studies, or complete reconnaissance surveys of individual areas
requiring a total expenditure of less than $25,000.
(5) Nothing in this section shall be construed to apply to or
to affect or alter the study of any river segment for potential
addition to the national wild and scenic rivers system or to
apply to or to affect or alter the study of any trail for
potential addition to the national trails system.
(c) Report.--(1) The Secretary of the Interior shall complete
the study for each area for potential inclusion in the National
Park System within 3 complete fiscal years following the date
of enactment of specific legislation providing for the study of
such area. Each study under this section shall be prepared with
appropriate opportunity for public involvement, including at
least one public meeting in the vicinity of the area under
study, and after reasonable efforts to notify potentially
affected landowners and State and local governments.
(2) In conducting the study, the Secretary shall consider
whether the area under study--
(A) possesses nationally significant natural or
cultural resources and represents one of the most
important examples of a particular resource type in the
country; and
(B) is a suitable and feasible addition to the
system.
(3) Each study--
(A) shall consider the following factors with regard
to the area being studied--
(i) the rarity and integrity of the
resources;
(ii) the threats to those resources;
(iii) similar resources are already protected
in the National Park System or in other public
or private ownership;
(iv) the public use potential;
(v) the interpretive and educational
potential;
(vi) costs associated with acquisition,
development and operation;
(vii) the socioeconomic impacts of any
designation;
(viii) the level of local and general public
support, and
(ix) whether the area is of appropriate
configuration to ensure long-term resource
protection and visitor use;
(B) shall consider whether direct National Park
Service management or alternative protection by other
public agencies or the private sector is appropriate
for the area;
(C) shall identify what alternative or combination of
alternatives would in the professional judgment of the
Director of the National Park Service be most effective
and efficient in protecting significant resources and
providing for public enjoyment; and
(D) may include any other information which the
Secretary deems to be relevant.
(4) Each study shall be completed in compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
(5) The letter transmitting each completed study to Congress
shall contain a recommendation regarding the Secretary's
preferred management option for the area.
(d) List of Areas.--At the beginning of each calendar year,
along with the annual budget submission, the Secretary of the
Interior shall submit to the Committee on Resources of the
House of Representatives and to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources of the United States Senate a list of areas
which have been previously studied which contain primarily
historical resources, and a list of areas which have been
previously studied which contain primarily natural resources,
in numerical order of priority for addition to the National
Park System. In developing the lists, the Secretary should
consider threats to resource values, cost escalation factors,
and other factors listed in subsection (c) of this section. The
Secretary should only include on the lists areas for which the
supporting data is current and accurate.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purposes of
carrying out the studies for potential new Park System units
and for monitoring the welfare of those resources, there are
authorized to be appropriated annually not to exceed
$1,000,000. For the purposes of monitoring the welfare and
integrity of the national landmarks, there are authorized to be
appropriated annually not to exceed $1,500,000. For carrying
out subsections (b) through (d) there are authorized to be
appropriated $2,000,000.
* * * * * * *