[House Report 110-95]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



From the House Reports Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]

110th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     110-95

======================================================================



 
       JOURNEY THROUGH HALLOWED GROUND NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA ACT

                                _______
                                

 April 17, 2007.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Rahall, from the Committee on Natural Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             DISSENTING AND

                      ADDITIONAL DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 319]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 319) to establish the Journey Through Hallowed 
Ground National Heritage Area, 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 all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

  (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Journey Through 
Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area Act''.
  (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act is as 
follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.
Sec. 3. Purposes.
Sec. 4. Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area.
Sec. 5. Authorities and duties of management entity.
Sec. 6. Approval or disapproval of management plan.
Sec. 7. Provision of financial and technical assistance.
Sec. 8. Duties of other Federal entities.
Sec. 9. Sunset for grants and other assistance.
Sec. 10. Private property and regulatory protections.
Sec. 11. Use of Federal funds from other sources.
Sec. 12. Authorization of appropriations.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

  In this Act:
          (1) Heritage area.--The term ``Heritage Area'' means the 
        Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area.
          (2) Management entity.--The term ``management entity'' means 
        The Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership, a Virginia 
        nonprofit corporation referred to in section 4(c), or its 
        successor entity.
          (3) Management plan.--The term ``management plan'' means the 
        management plan for the Heritage Area.
          (4) Partner.--The term ``partner'' means--
                  (A) a Federal, State, or local governmental entity; 
                and
                  (B) an organization, private industry, or individual 
                involved in promoting the conservation and preservation 
                of the historical, cultural, and recreational resources 
                of the Heritage Area.
          (5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
        the Interior.

SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

  The purposes of the Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage 
Area include--
          (1) to preserve, support, conserve, and interpret the legacy 
        of the American history created along the Heritage Area;
          (2) to promote heritage, cultural and recreational tourism 
        and to develop educational and cultural programs for visitors 
        and the general public;
          (3) to recognize and interpret important events and 
        geographic locations representing key developments in the 
        creation of America, including Native American, Colonial 
        American, European American, and African American heritage;
          (4) to recognize and interpret the effect of the Civil War on 
        the civilian population of the Heritage Area during the war and 
        post-war reconstruction period;
          (5) to enhance a cooperative management framework to assist 
        the Commonwealth of Virginia, the State of Maryland, the 
        Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the State of West Virginia, and 
        their units of local government, the private sector, and 
        citizens residing in the Heritage Area in conserving, 
        supporting, enhancing, and interpreting the significant 
        historic, cultural and recreational sites in the Heritage Area; 
        and
          (6) to provide appropriate linkages among units of the 
        National Park System within and surrounding the Heritage Area, 
        to protect, enhance, and interpret resources outside of park 
        boundaries.

SEC. 4. JOURNEY THROUGH HALLOWED GROUND NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA.

  (a) Establishment.--There is hereby established the Journey Through 
Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area.
  (b) Boundaries.--
          (1) In general.--The Heritage Area shall consist of the 175-
        mile region generally following the Route 15 corridor and 
        surrounding areas from Adams County, Pennsylvania, through 
        Frederick County, Maryland, including the Heart of the Civil 
        War Maryland State Heritage Area, looping through Brunswick, 
        Maryland, to Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, back through Loudoun 
        County, Virginia, to the Route 15 corridor and surrounding 
        areas encompassing portions of Loudoun and Prince William 
        Counties, Virginia, then Fauquier County, Virginia, portions of 
        Spotsylvania and Madison Counties, Virginia, and Culpepper, 
        Rappahannock, Orange, and Albemarle Counties, Virginia. The 
        boundaries of the Heritage Area shall include all of those 
        lands and interests as generally depicted on the map titled 
        ``Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area'', 
        numbered P90/80,000, and dated October 2006.
          (2) Map.--The map referred to in paragraph (1) shall be on 
        file in the appropriate offices of the National Park Service.
  (c) Management Entity.--The management entity for the Heritage Area 
shall be The Journey Through Hallowed Ground Partnership, a Virginia 
nonprofit corporation.
  (d) Board of Trustees.--The board of trustees of the management 
entity shall include representatives from a broad cross-section of the 
individuals, agencies, organizations, States, and governments that--
          (1) are partners of the management entity; and
          (2) will oversee the development and implementation of the 
        management plan.

SEC. 5. AUTHORITIES AND DUTIES OF MANAGEMENT ENTITY.

  (a) Authorities of the Management Entity.--
          (1) Authority to accept funds.--The management entity may 
        accept funds from any Federal source and from States and their 
        political subdivisions, private organizations, nonprofit 
        organizations, or any other person to carry out its authorities 
        and duties under this Act.
          (2) Use of funds.--The management entity may use funds made 
        available under this Act for purposes of preparing, updating, 
        and implementing the management plan. Such purposes may include 
        the following:
                  (A) Making grants to, and entering into cooperative 
                agreements with, States and their political 
                subdivisions, private organizations, non-profit 
                organizations or any other person.
                  (B) Hiring and compensating staff.
                  (C) Entering into contracts for goods, services, and 
                leases for office space.
                  (D) Undertaking any other initiatives that advance 
                the purposes of the Heritage Area.
  (b) Management Plan.--The management entity shall develop a 
management plan for the Heritage Area that--
          (1) presents comprehensive strategies and recommendations for 
        conservation, funding, management, and development of the 
        Heritage Area;
          (2) takes into consideration existing State, county, and 
        local plans and involves residents, public agencies, and 
        private organizations working in the Heritage Area;
          (3) includes a description of actions that units of 
        government and private organizations and individuals have 
        decided to undertake in furtherance of the purposes of this 
        Act;
          (4) specifies the existing and potential sources of funding 
        to protect, support, manage, and develop the Heritage Area;
          (5) includes an inventory of the natural, historical, 
        cultural, architectural, scenic, and recreational resources in 
        the Heritage Area that wish to be preserved, restored, 
        supported, managed, developed, or maintained, because of the 
        national historic significance of the resources;
          (6) includes an analysis of ways in which local, State, and 
        Federal programs may coordinate to promote the purposes of this 
        Act; including recommendations from the Commonwealth of 
        Virginia, the States of Maryland and West Virginia, and the 
        Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (and political subdivisions 
        thereof) for the management, protection, support, and 
        interpretation of the natural, cultural, and historical 
        resources of the Heritage Area;
          (7) identifies appropriate partners and partnerships among 
        Federal, State, and local governments, regional entities, and 
        the private sector in furtherance of the purposes of the Act;
          (8) includes locations for visitor contact and major 
        interpretive facilities;
          (9) includes provisions for appropriate living history 
        demonstrations and battlefield reenactments;
          (10) includes provisions for implementing a continuing 
        program of interpretation for resident, student, and visitor 
        education concerning the resources and values of the Heritage 
        Area;
          (11) includes provisions for a uniform historical marker and 
        wayside exhibit program in the Heritage Area, including a 
        provision for marking, with the consent of the owner, historic 
        structures and properties that are contained within the 
        historic core areas and contribute to the understanding of the 
        Heritage Area;
          (12) includes provisions for the protection and 
        interpretation of the natural, cultural, and historic resources 
        of the Heritage Area consistent with this Act; and
          (13) includes provisions for the development of educational 
        outreach programs for students of all ages to further the 
        understanding of the vast resources within the Heritage Area.
  (c) Deadline for Submission; Prerequisites.--
          (1) Deadline.--The management entity shall submit the 
        management plan to the Secretary not later than the end of the 
        three-year period beginning on the date on which funds are 
        first made available for this Act.
          (2) Prerequisites.--Before submitting the management plan to 
        the Secretary, the management entity shall ensure that--
                  (A) the Commonwealth of Virginia, the States of 
                Maryland and West Virginia, the Commonwealth of 
                Pennsylvania, and any political subdivision thereof 
                that would be affected by the management plan, receives 
                a copy of the management plan;
                  (B) adequate notice of availability of the management 
                plan is provided through publication in appropriate 
                local newspapers in the area of the Heritage Area;
                  (C) at least one public hearing is conducted by the 
                management entity at a location within the Heritage 
                Area in each congressional district included in whole 
                or in part in the Heritage Area to review and receive 
                comments on the management plan; and
                  (D) a committee made up of elected officials of local 
                governments within the boundaries of the Heritage Area, 
                including mayors, town and county council chairs, and 
                members of borough commissions and boards of 
                supervisors, has had an opportunity to review, comment 
                on, and approve (by majority vote) the management plan.
  (d) Termination of Funding.--If a management plan is not submitted to 
the Secretary in accordance with subsection (c), the Secretary shall 
not, after the end of the period specified in such subsection, provide 
any grant or other assistance under this Act with respect to the 
Heritage Area until a management plan for the Heritage Area is 
submitted to the Secretary.
  (e) Duties of Management Entity.--The management entity shall--
          (1) give priority to implementing actions set forth in the 
        management plan;
          (2) assist units of government, regional planning 
        organizations, and nonprofit organizations in--
                  (A) establishing and maintaining interpretive 
                materials and exhibits in the Heritage Area;
                  (B) developing historical and cultural resources and 
                educational programs in the Heritage Area;
                  (C) increasing public awareness of and appreciation 
                for the natural, historical, cultural, architectural, 
                scenic, and recreational resources and sites in the 
                Heritage Area;
                  (D) the restoration of any historic building relating 
                to the themes of the Heritage Area;
                  (E) ensuring that clear signs identifying access 
                points and sites of interest are put in place 
                throughout the Heritage Area; and
                  (F) carrying out other actions that the management 
                entity determines to be advisable to fulfill the 
                purposes of this Act;
          (3) encourage by appropriate means economic viability in the 
        Heritage Area consistent with the purposes of this Act;
          (4) consider the interests of diverse governmental, business, 
        nonprofit groups, and individuals within the Heritage Area; and
          (5) for any year in which Federal funds have been provided to 
        implement the management plan--
                  (A) conduct public meetings at least annually 
                regarding the implementation of the management plan;
                  (B) submit an annual report to the Secretary setting 
                forth accomplishments, expenses and income, and each 
                person to which any grant was made by the management 
                entity in the year for which the report is made; and
                  (C) require, for all agreements entered into by the 
                management entity authorizing expenditure of Federal 
                funds by any other person, that the person making the 
                expenditure make available to the management entity for 
                audit all records pertaining to the expenditure of such 
                funds.
  (f) Prohibition on the Acquisition of Real Property.--The management 
entity may not use Federal funds received under this Act to acquire 
real property or any interest in real property. No State or local 
subdivision of a State shall use any Federal funds received pursuant to 
this Act to acquire any interest in real property by condemnation or 
otherwise.

SEC. 6. APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF MANAGEMENT PLAN.

  (a) Time for Consideration; Criteria.--The Secretary, in consultation 
with the Governors of the Commonwealth of Virginia, the States of 
Maryland and West Virginia, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, shall 
approve or disapprove a management plan submitted under section 5 not 
later than 180 days after receiving the plan. In considering the plan, 
the Secretary shall take into consideration the following criteria:
          (1) The extent to which the management plan, when 
        implemented, would adequately preserve, support and protect the 
        significant historical, cultural and recreational resources of 
        the Heritage Area.
          (2) The level of public participation in the development of 
        the management plan.
          (3) The extent to which the board of trustees of the 
        management entity is representative of the local governments 
        affected and a wide range of interested organizations and 
        citizens.
  (b) Action Following Disapproval.--If the Secretary disapproves a 
management plan, the Secretary shall advise the management entity in 
writing of the reasons for the disapproval and shall make 
recommendations for revisions in the management plan. The Secretary 
shall approve or disapprove a proposed revision within 180 days after 
the date it is submitted.
  (c) Approving Changes.--The Secretary shall review and approve or 
disapprove any amendment to the management plan that would make a 
substantial change to the management plan, as determined by the 
Secretary. The review and approval or disapproval of an amendment shall 
be conducted in the manner provided under subsections (a) and (b). 
Funds appropriated under this Act may not be expended to implement the 
changes made by such an amendment unless and until the Secretary 
approves the amendment.
  (d) Availability of Annual Reports.--The management entity shall post 
each annual report prepared under section 5(e)(5)(B) on a website 
maintained by the management entity.

SEC. 7. PROVISION OF FINANCIAL AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.

  (a) Overall Assistance.--Upon the request of the management entity 
and subject to the availability of appropriations, the Secretary may 
provide technical and financial assistance to the management entity to 
carry out its duties under this Act, including updating and 
implementing the management plan and, prior to approval of the 
management plan, providing assistance for initiatives.
  (b) Technical Assistance.--If the Secretary has the resources 
available to provide technical assistance to the management entity to 
carry out its duties under this Act, including updating and 
implementing the management plan and, prior to approval of the 
management plan, providing assistance for initiatives, the Secretary 
shall provide such assistance upon the request of the management 
entity. Technical assistance provided under this subsection shall be 
provided on a reimbursable basis, except that this subsection does not 
preclude the Secretary from providing nonreimbursable assistance under 
subsection (a).
  (c) Priority.--In assisting the management entity, the Secretary 
shall give priority to actions that assist in--
          (1) the implementation of the management plan;
          (2) the provision of educational assistance and advice 
        regarding management of the significant historic resources of 
        the region;
          (3) the development and application of techniques promoting 
        the preservation of cultural, recreational and historic 
        properties;
          (4) the preservation, restoration, and reuse of publicly and 
        privately owned historic buildings;
          (5) the design and fabrication of a wide range of 
        interpretive materials based on the management plan, including, 
        among other things, guide brochures, visitor displays, audio-
        visual, books, interpretive dialogues, interactive exhibits, 
        and educational curriculum materials for public education; and
          (6) the implementation of initiatives prior to approval of 
        the management plan.
  (d) Matching Funds.--As a condition of providing financial assistance 
under this section to the management entity, the Secretary shall 
require the recipient to provide matching funds in an amount equal to 
the amount of the financial assistance provided by the Secretary. 
Recipient matching funds--
          (1) shall be derived from non-Federal sources; and
          (2) may be made in the form of in-kind contributions of goods 
        and services fairly valued.

SEC. 8. DUTIES OF OTHER FEDERAL ENTITIES.

  Any Federal entity conducting or supporting activities directly 
affecting the Heritage Area shall--
          (1) consult with the Secretary and the management entity with 
        respect to such activities;
          (2) cooperate with the Secretary and the management entity in 
        carrying out their duties under this Act and, to the maximum 
        extent practicable, coordinate such activities with the 
        carrying out of such duties; and
          (3) to the maximum extent practicable, conduct or support 
        such activities in a manner that the management entity 
        determines shall not have an adverse effect on the Heritage 
        Area.

SEC. 9. SUNSET FOR GRANTS AND OTHER ASSISTANCE.

  The Secretary may not make any grant or provide any other financial 
assistance under this Act after the expiration of the 15-year period 
beginning on the date that funds are first made available for this Act.

SEC. 10. PRIVATE PROPERTY AND REGULATORY PROTECTIONS.

  Nothing in this Act--
          (1) abridges the rights of any property owner (whether public 
        or private), including the right to refrain from participating 
        in any plan, project, program, or activity conducted within the 
        National Heritage Area;
          (2) requires any property owner to permit public access 
        (including access by Federal, State, or local agencies) to the 
        property of the property owner, or to modify public access or 
        use of property of the property owner under any other Federal, 
        State, or local law;
          (3) alters any duly adopted land use regulation, approved 
        land use plan, or other regulatory authority of any Federal, 
        State, or local agency, including but not limited to the 
        authority of Federal, State, or local governments to make 
        safety improvements or increase the capacity of existing roads 
        or to construct new roads, or conveys any land use or other 
        regulatory authority to any local coordinating entity;
          (4) authorizes or implies the reservation or appropriation of 
        water or water rights;
          (5) diminishes the authority of the State to manage fish and 
        wildlife, including the regulation of fishing and hunting 
        within the National Heritage Area; or
          (6) creates any liability, or affects any liability under any 
        other law, of any private property owner with respect to any 
        person injured on the private property.

SEC. 11. USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS FROM OTHER SOURCES.

  Nothing in this Act shall preclude the management entity from using 
Federal funds available under Acts other than this Act for the purposes 
for which those funds were authorized.

SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

  (a) Authorization of Appropriations.--Subject to subsection (b), 
there are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act not more 
than $1,000,000 for any fiscal year. Funds so appropriated shall remain 
available until expended.
  (b) Limitation on Total Amounts Appropriated.--Not more than 
$10,000,000 may be appropriated to carry out this Act.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 319 is to establish the Journey Through 
Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area in Pennsylvania, 
Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    National Heritage Areas are locally-driven projects which 
conserve and interpret historic and cultural resources through 
coordinated efforts by federal, state and local governmental 
entities as well as private parties. The Department of the 
Interior, acting through the National Park Service, provides 
limited matching funds and technical assistance to a designated 
local entity responsible for coordinating management of the 
area. Heritage areas require Congressional authorization and 
must have completed a study, acceptable to the Secretary of the 
Interior, supporting designation. To date, Congress has 
approved 37 national heritage areas.
    H.R. 319 would establish a new national heritage area 
spanning parts of Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia and 
Virginia. Specifically, the new area would include 175 miles of 
``historic transportation routes'' beginning at Gettysburg 
National Military Park and generally following Route 15 through 
Pennsylvania and Maryland and Route 20 through Virginia. The 
heritage area would also loop into West Virginia to include 
Harper's Ferry.
    According to the study commissioned by the proposed 
management entity, the heritage area would encompass eight 
homes of former U.S. Presidents, the largest concentration of 
Civil War battlefields in the country, 13 National Historic 
Landmarks and 2 World Heritage Sites, among other resources.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 319 was introduced January 5, 2007, by Representative 
Frank Wolf (R-VA). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Natural Resources. On March 7, 2007, the Committee met to 
consider the bill. National Parks, Forests and Public Lands 
Subcommittee Chairman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) offered an amendment 
in the nature of a substitute to conform sections in the bill 
as introduced regarding property rights to legislation approved 
by the Senate.
    Representative Jeff Flake (R-AZ) offered two amendments to 
the Grijalva amendment. An amendment identified as ``Flake A'' 
prohibiting the use of federal funds received by the heritage 
area for lobbying was not agreed to by a roll call vote of 15 
to 22 as follows:


    An amendment identified as ``Flake B'' prohibiting any 
federal funds for implementation of this act was offered and 
withdrawn.
    Representative Stevan Pearce (R-NM) also offered an 
amendment to the Grijalva amendment. An amendment identified as 
``Pearce .021'' requring individualized notice to all private 
property owners within the heritage area was not agreed to by a 
vote of 15 to 22 as follows:


    The amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by 
Subcommittee Chairman Grijalva was then agreed to by voice 
vote. The bill as amended was then ordered favorably reported 
to the House of Representatives by voice vote.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title; table of contents

    Section 1 entitles the bill the ``Journey Through Hallowed 
Ground National Heritage Area Act'' and includes a table of 
contents.

Section 2. Definitions

    Section 2 defines the terms used in this Act.

Section 3. Purposes

    Section 3 establishes the purposes of the heritage area. 
These purposes include preservation and promotion of historic 
resources as well as enhanced cooperation between states, units 
of local government and private entities.

Section 4. Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area

    Section 4(a) establishes the heritage area and section 4(b) 
defines its boundaries. Section 4(c) identifies the Journey 
Through Hallowed Ground Partnership as the area's management 
entity. Section 4(d) includes requirements for membership on 
the board of trustees of the management entity.

Section 5. Authorities and duties of the management entity

    Section 5 outlines the authorities and duties of the 
management entity including the authority to accept funds from 
specified sources and use funds for specified purposes. Section 
5 also details requirements for development and approval of the 
area's management plan. Section 5(f) specifically prohibits the 
management entity from using federal funds to acquire real 
property.

Section 6. Approval or disapproval of the management plan

    Section 6 establishes a procedure for approval of the 
area's management plan, including a process to amend the plan 
should it be disapproved by the Secretary.

Section 7. Provision of technical and financial assistance

    Section 7 authorizes the Secretary to provide technical and 
financial assistance to the management entity, contingent on 
provision of an equal amount of matching funds from the 
management entity.

Section 8. Duties of other federal entities

    Section 8 requires any federal agency conducting or 
supporting activities which directly affect the heritage area 
to consult with the management entity and to cooperate with the 
Secretary to avoid adverse effects to the area, to the maximum 
extent practicable.

Section 9. Sunset for grants and other assistance

    The authority to make grants or to provide other financial 
assistance under this Act expires 15 years after the date funds 
are first made available for this Act.

Section 10. Private property and regulatory protections

    Section 10 specifies that nothing in this act abridges the 
rights of any property owner within the area or requires any 
owner to permit public access to private property. Section 10 
also establishes that H.R. 319 does not alter any duly adopted 
land use regulation or other regulatory authority of any 
federal, state or local agency or imply or authorize the 
reservation or appropriation of any water rights. Finally, 
Section 10 makes clear that nothing in this Act diminishes 
State authority over fish and wildlife nor creates any 
liability under any other law of any private property owner 
with respect to any person injured on private property.

Section 11. Use of Federal funds from other sources

    Section 11 specifically allows the management entity to use 
federal funds made available under other acts.

Section 12. Authorization of appropriations

    Section 12 authorizes not more than $1 million for any 
fiscal year, not to exceed $10 million total, to carry out this 
Act.

            COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee on Natural Resources' oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

                   CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

    Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United 
States grants Congress the authority to enact this bill.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

    1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) 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 this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) 
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 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2) 
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this 
bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending 
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in 
revenues or tax expenditures.
    3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or 
objective of this bill is to establish the Journey Through 
Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area.
    4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause 
3(c)(3) of rule XIII 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 this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office:

H.R. 319--Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area Act

    Summary: H.R. 319 would establish the Journey Through 
Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area (NHA) along the corridor 
from Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to Charlottesville, Virginia. 
The bill would designate the Journey Through Hallowed Ground 
partnership as the local coordinating entity for the proposed 
NHA. The partnership would be responsible for developing and 
implementing a management plan to develop, restore, and 
maintain the NHA.
    The legislation would authorize the appropriation of $10 
million, not to exceed $1 million annually, for financial 
assistance to the partnership over the next 15 years. CBO 
estimates that implementing H.R. 319 would cost $5 million over 
the 2008-2012 period, with additional amounts spent after 2012. 
Enacting H.R. 319 would have no effect on revenues or direct 
spending.
    H.R. 319 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on State, local, or tribal 
governments.
    Estimated Cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact is shown in the following table. The costs of 
this legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural 
resources and environment).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      By fiscal year, in millions of
                                                 dollars--
                                 ---------------------------------------
                                   2008    2009    2010    2011    2012
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level...       1       1       1       1       1
Estimated Outlays...............       1       1       1       1       1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Basis of Estimate: Assuming appropriation of the authorized 
amounts, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 319 would cost $5 
million over the 2008-2012 period and $10 million over the 
following five to 10 years. Such amounts would be used to cover 
a portion of the costs of planning, establishing, operating, 
and interpreting the heritage area.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 319 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on State, local, or 
tribal governments.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Tyler Kruzich; Impact 
on State, local, and tribal governments: Marjorie Miller; 
Impact on the Private Sector: Tyler Kruzich.
    Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                           EARMARK STATEMENT

    H.R. 865 does not contain any congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 
clause 9(d), 9(e) or 9(f) of rule XXI.

                PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

    This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or 
tribal law.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing 
law.

                      DISSENTING VIEWS ON H.R. 319

    We oppose H.R. 319 in its current form. Moreover, we are 
dismayed at the cavalier and partisan manner the Majority used 
to report it from Committee during our first mark-up of the 
110th Congress. Hopefully, this is not a harbinger of how the 
Committee will operate during the next two years.
    H.R. 319's predecessor, H.R. 5195, was introduced late in 
the 109th Congress by Mr. Wolf. The Subcommittee on National 
Parks' September 28, 2006 legislative hearing was unusually 
contentious with very divergent testimony from sponsor Mr. Wolf 
and Mr. Bartlett whose district contains a significant portion 
of the proposed heritage area. The principal disagreement 
concerned property rights which Mr. Bartlett felt needed 
stronger protections in the legislation.
    These strong differences persisted into the 110th Congress. 
Mr. Wolf introduced H.R. 319, which is essentially identical to 
his previous bill. Mr. Bartlett introduced his own version of 
the Journey Through Hallowed Ground Heritage Area, H.R. 1270, 
which is vastly different from the Wolf bill and has a stronger 
emphasis on protecting property rights, more diverse board 
representation on the management entity and deleted all 
references to federal funding. Mr. Bartlett wrote Chairman 
Rahall and other Committee Members requesting a hearing on his 
legislation. Normally, such a reasonable and customary Member 
request is honored but not in this case. This is very 
surprising since the Chairman told Committee Members during the 
February 7, 2007 Natural Resources Committee organizational 
meeting that he intended to follow ``regular order'' during the 
110th Congress which historically means holding subcommittee 
hearings and mark-ups on legislation. Moving this bill which is 
opposed by Mr. Bartlett, and whose district is affected, is a 
dangerous precedent that we hope will not be repeated.
    Unfortunately, the very reasonable and modest private 
property rights protections contained in H.R. 319, and included 
in the authoring legislation of the last twelve national 
heritage areas, were emasculated by the Grijalva Substitute.
    However, Committee Republicans offered two amendments to 
the Grijalva Substitute to make it friendlier to private 
landowners and advocates of local control. Unfortunately, both 
were defeated on party line votes of 15-22.
    Mr. Flake offered an amendment merely restating current 
federal law (18 USC, 1819), that bans lobbying by those 
receiving federal funds. The amendment is appropriate and 
warranted because we have seen examples of federal agencies and 
non-profit groups using federal funds to lobby. It seeks to 
prevent the National Park Service and heritage area management 
entities from influencing local zoning and land use controls on 
private property. The Flake amendment would have reinforced 
this committee's commitment to transparency, responsibility, 
and accountability of those who come to this body for 
significant financial authorizations.
    The second amendment, offered by Mr. Pearce required 
written notification of private property owners located within 
the boundaries of the heritage area before the management plan 
could be submitted to the Secretary of the Interior for 
approval. This amendment was quickly dismissed by the majority 
as an unreasonable request. Additionally, the Chairman of the 
National Parks, Forests and Public Lands Committee, Mr. 
Grijalva rejected the amendment because, as he stated, ``the 
ability for the public to opt in or opt out of the heritage 
area is already present in the underlying substitute.'' 
Unfortunately, there is no ``opt in'' language in the 
substitute offered by Congressman Grijalva, and his amendment 
struck the ``opt out'' language.
    Previous to this Congress, the work of this committee had 
ensured that private property owners within a heritage area 
could remove their land from the boundary of the designation 
and prohibited the management entity from preserving, 
conserving, or promoting one's property without the written 
consent of the owner. Those safeguards were deleted by the 
Grijalva Substitute purportedly because they could create 
problems for the management entity. Property rights should 
never be dismissed merely because they could be an 
inconvenience. With the elimination of these protections from 
the bill as introduced, the notification amendment would have 
provided property owners the right, at a minimum, to know what 
the federal government will place over them.
    Although we oppose H.R. 319 in its current form, we are 
hopeful there will be a free and open debate on the House Floor 
with opportunities to consider again the Flake and Pearce 
Amendments.

                                   Rob Bishop.
                                   Stevan Pearce.
                                   Doug Lamborn.
                                   Dean Heller.
                                   Bill Sali.
                                   John Duncan.
                                   Bobby Jindal.
                                   Elton Gallegly.
                                   Cathy McMorris Rodgers.
                                   Henry Brown.
                                   Bill Shuster.
                                   Jeff Flake.
                                   Rick Renzi.
                                   Chris Cannon.
                                   Ken Calvert.

                      ADDITIONAL DISSENTING VIEWS

    All National Heritage Areas deserve scrutiny by the members 
of the House Natural Resources Committee. Since 1984, when the 
first National Heritage Area (the Illinois and Michigan Canal 
National Heritage Area) was passed by Congress, the practice of 
designating National Heritage Areas has grown exponentially. 
More than twenty years later, 37 National Heritage Areas exist. 
In the last Congress, nearly 50 bills were introduced to 
designate or study designating new National Heritage Areas. The 
new majority has approved, within the first markup of the 
Natural Resources Committee, two more National Heritage Areas. 
Eleven National Heritage Area bills have already been 
introduced in the House within the first three months of the 
new Congress.
    There are many reasons to be skeptical of National Heritage 
Areas. First, and foremost, is the question of federal 
spending. According to the Congressional Research Service, 
National Heritage Areas are ``intended to promote local 
economic development as well as to protect natural and cultural 
heritage resources and values.'' Protecting natural and 
cultural heritage aside (which state, local and private 
entities can already do), the federal government does not have 
a responsibility to promote the local economy of any district.
    In addition, once a federal line is drawn around property 
for a heritage area, the door for annual federal earmarks and 
grants is opened. 24 of these heritage areas were listed in the 
FY 2007 Interior Appropriations bill as line items, each 
receiving hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars. In 
addition, a new White House federal grant initiative entitled 
``Preserve America'' doled out nine federal grants to projects 
in National Heritage Areas. I am sure these grants will only 
continue and expand to all 37 existing heritage areas.
    I challenge any member of the committee to ask themselves 
if $700,000 for the Silos and Smokestacks National Heritage 
Area sounds like a rationale expenditure of federal tax dollars 
when we have a huge deficit and vast maintenance backlogs in 
our parks and forests, not to mention ongoing conflicts abroad 
to fund.
    In addition, the management entity designated to manage the 
Journey Through Hallowed Ground National Heritage Area received 
$1 million in federal funding in the form of an earmark in the 
transportation bill in 2005 before the organization was 
officially registered as a non-profit and before the heritage 
area was created. The entity, the Journey Through Hallowed 
Ground Partnership, has raised significant private funds. It 
does not need scarce federal dollars to accomplish its stated 
goals.
    As the record will show, I offered an amendment to H.R. 319 
that would have restricted the federal funds received by the 
organization so that those funds could not be used for federal, 
state or local lobbying. Disappointingly, the amendment was 
rejected on a party-line vote.
    Another important point is the effect these designations 
have on private property rights. When the federal government 
draws a federal line around private property, negative impacts 
on the private property owner will always result. Injecting the 
federal government into the lives of property owners in 
Virginia and Maryland in the form of a heritage area 
designation is just wrong. At a minimum, the committee should 
have included language in the bill guaranteeing private 
property owners protection from the National Park Service, or a 
proxy management entity, in local zoning and land use 
decisions.
                                                        Jeff Flake.

                                  
