[House Report 116-222]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


116th Congress    }                                    {        Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session      }                                    {       116-222

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



 
                 GRAND CANYON CENTENNIAL PROTECTION ACT

                                _______
                                

October 4, 2019.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 1373]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 1373) to protect, for current and future 
generations, the watershed, ecosystem, and cultural heritage of 
the Grand Canyon region in the State of Arizona, 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.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Grand Canyon Centennial Protection 
Act''.

SEC. 2. WITHDRAWAL OF CERTAIN FEDERAL LAND IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA.

  (a) Definition Of Map.--In this Act, the term ``Map'' means the map 
prepared by the Bureau of Land Management entitled ``Grand Canyon 
Centennial Protection Act'' and dated July 11, 2019.
  (b) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid existing rights, the approximately 
1,006,545 acres of Federal land in the State of Arizona, generally 
depicted on the Map as ``Federal Mineral Estate to be Withdrawn'', 
including any land or interest in land that is acquired by the United 
States after the date of the enactment of this Act, are hereby 
withdrawn from--
          (1) all forms of entry, appropriation, and disposal under the 
        public land laws;
          (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
          (3) operation of the mineral leasing, mineral materials, and 
        geothermal leasing laws.
  (c) Availability Of Map.--The Map shall be kept on file and made 
available for public inspection in the appropriate offices of the 
Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 1373 is to protect, for current and 
future generations, the watershed, ecosystem, and cultural 
heritage of the Grand Canyon region in the State of Arizona.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Federal efforts to protect the Grand Canyon's iconic 
landscape began in 1882 when then-Senator Benjamin Harrison 
introduced a bill to establish the Grand Canyon National Park. 
While that bill was unsuccessful, it motivated protective 
actions for the region, including preservation as a Forest 
Reserve in 1893, and President Theodore Roosevelt's 1908 
declaration of the Grand Canyon National Monument under the 
recently passed Antiquities Act of 1906. These designations 
paved the way for the Grand Canyon's designation as a national 
park on February 26, 1919. In 1979, the park was recognized by 
UNESCO as a World Heritage Site. However, despite the 
longstanding interest in preserving the unique values of the 
Grand Canyon, the region has continued to face threats from 
development and mineral extraction--in particular, from uranium 
extraction.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Amber Reimondo, Grand Canyon Trust, Uranium Mining in the Grand 
Canyon Region (2019), https://www.grandcanyontrust.org/sites/default/
files/resources/Uranium_Mining_Grand_Canyon_Region_2019.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The history of uranium extraction in the Grand Canyon 
region began during the atomic era in 1950 when prospectors 
mined millions of tons of uranium ore from tribal and public 
lands, leaving behind a toxic legacy that has scarred the 
landscape and polluted the region's water and air. In the mid-
2000s, a spike in the uranium market renewed mining interests 
in the region and triggered 10,000 new mining claims around the 
Grand Canyon by the end of the decade.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\Id. at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 2012, the Secretary of the Interior issued a 20-year 
moratorium on new mining claims on over 1 million acres 
surrounding Grand Canyon National Park, due in part to the lack 
of scientific knowledge regarding the environmental impacts of 
uranium mining. The decision was the result of more than two 
years of evaluation, including an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS)\3\ and 350,000 public comments. In addition, 
the Bureau of Land Management, in cooperation with the U.S. 
Forest Service, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, National Park Service, tribes, counties, and other 
stakeholders, determined that the threat of uranium mining to 
environmental quality and public health warranted further study 
before allowing any new mineral claims in the Northern Arizona 
withdrawal area. The EIS that preceded the moratorium found 
that groundwater contamination from uranium mining posed a 
potentially high risk to water supplies in the region.\4\ The 
EIS also found that any mining within the region, a recognized 
traditional homeland and use area for seven tribes, posed a 
threat to sacred and traditional sites.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\Bureau of Land Mgmt., Northern Arizona Proposed Withdrawal Final 
Environmental Impact Statement (2011).
    \4\Id.
    \5\Id.; see also U.S. Dep't of the Interior, Record of Decision: 
Northern Arizona Withdrawal Mohave and Coconino Counties, Arizona 
(2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The 20-year moratorium was intended to mitigate these 
recognized impacts and to provide time for further study of the 
region's hydrology before the moratorium expired in 2032. 
However, these efforts have been chronically underfunded and 
remain incomplete. Given the lack of reliable data, along with 
the known impacts that mining would have on tribal sites and 
the regional environment, and the potential for significant 
groundwater impacts, it is essential that Congress act to 
permanently protect the Grand Canyon region from uranium 
mining.
    The Grand Canyon is vital to the region's economy and is 
home to significant hydrological resources, including the 
Colorado River watershed, abundant biodiversity and habitat, 
and culturally important resources. Visitors to Grand Canyon 
National Park contributed $947 million\6\ to gateway economies 
in 2018 and helped generate $160 million in local and state tax 
revenue in 2016. Public lands such as national parks often play 
an important economic role for local communities. However, the 
economic benefits of protected sites are heavily dependent on 
the preservation of untouched landscapes, recreation 
opportunities, and wildlife.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\Headwater Econ., National Park Economic Impacts (last updated 
Aug. 2019), https://headwaterseconomics.org/dataviz/national-park-
service-units/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Protecting the waters of the Grand Canyon is also of 
interest for many of the tribal communities in the region, 
including the Havasupai people who have lived in Supai village 
at the bottom of the Canyon for more than 1,000 years. The 
Havasupai rely on the springs and flows from the Canyon for 
nearly all of their drinking water; therefore, contamination 
from uranium mining would pose an existential threat to their 
lives and culture.
    To ensure that the risks posed by mining activities do not 
continue to threaten the Grand Canyon's treasured landscape and 
its unique resources, Representative Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) 
introduced H.R. 1373 to formally remove the 2012 moratorium 
area from the jurisdiction of the public land laws, the Mining 
Law of 1872, and the Mineral Leasing Act--barring new claims 
for locatable minerals such as uranium and new leases for 
leasable minerals such as coal. This bill would prevent future 
damage to the region's exceptional resources while protecting 
tribal communities, local economies, and the region's 
hydrological resources.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 1373 was introduced on February 26, 2019, by Chair 
Raul Grijalva (D-AZ). The bill was referred solely to the 
Committee on Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the 
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands. On 
June 5, 2019, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill. On 
July 17, 2019, the Natural Resources Committee met to consider 
the bill. The Subcommittee was discharged by unanimous consent. 
Chair Grijalva offered an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute. Representative Paul Gosar (R-AZ) offered an 
amendment designated Gosar #1 to the amendment in the nature of 
a substitute. The amendment was not agreed to by a roll call 
vote of 14 yeas and 20 nays, as follows:

              [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Representative Gosar offered an amendment designated Gosar 
#2 to the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The 
amendment was not agreed to by a roll call vote of 14 yeas and 
20 nays, as follows:

              [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Representative Gosar offered an amendment designated Gosar 
#3 to the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The 
amendment was not agreed to by a roll call vote of 14 yeas and 
20 nays, as follows:

              [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Representative Liz Cheney (R-WY) offered an amendment 
designated Cheney #4 to the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute. The amendment was not agreed to by a roll call vote 
of 15 yeas and 19 nays, as follows:

              [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Representative Gosar offered an amendment designated Gosar 
#5 to the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The 
amendment was not agreed to by a roll call vote of 14 yeas and 
20 nays, as follows:

              [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Representative Gosar offered an amendment designated Gosar 
#6 to the amendment in the nature of a substitute. The 
amendment was not agreed to by a roll call vote of 14 yeas and 
20 nays, as follows:

              [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    The amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by 
Chair Grijalva was adopted by voice vote. The bill, as amended, 
was ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives 
by a roll call vote of 21 yeas and 14 nays, as follows:

              [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                HEARINGS

    For the purposes of section 103(i) of H. Res. 6 of the 
116th Congress--the following hearing was used to develop or 
consider H.R. 1373: hearing by the Subcommittee on National 
Parks, Forests, and Public Lands on H.R. 1373 and H.R. 2181 
held on June 5, 2019.

            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.

      COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII AND CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT

    1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act. 
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) and (3) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
sections 308(a) and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974, the Committee has received the following estimate for the 
bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, August 2, 2019.
Hon. Raul M. Grijalva,
Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1373, the Grand 
Canyon Centennial Protection Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Janani 
Shankaran.
            Sincerely,
                                         Phillip L. Swagel,
                                                          Director.
    Enclosure.

              [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

    H.R. 1373 would withdraw roughly 1 million acres of federal 
land in Arizona from mining laws and mineral and geothermal 
leasing, subject to valid existing rights. That is, the bill 
would not allow new mining or mineral production on those 
lands, which are adjacent to Grand Canyon National Park.
    Under a public land order issued by the Department of the 
Interior (DOI), the affected lands are withdrawn from location 
and entry under mining laws until 2032. CBO estimates that any 
administrative costs to implement the mineral and geothermal 
leasing withdrawal would be insignificant; any spending would 
be subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
    Enacting H.R. 1373 could increase direct spending. Payments 
from mineral and geothermal leasing are classified as 
offsetting receipts and recorded in the budget as reductions in 
direct spending. Using information from DOI, CBO expects that 
the affected land has moderate potential for geothermal 
resources and could be leased in the future. We estimate that 
any forgone receipts under the bill would be insignificant over 
the 2019-2029 period.
    CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1373 would not 
significantly increase on-budget deficits in any of the four 
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2030.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Janani 
Shankaran. The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, 
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
    2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goals and 
objectives of this bill is to protect, for current and future 
generations, the watershed, ecosystem, and cultural heritage of 
the Grand Canyon region in the State of Arizona.

                           EARMARK STATEMENT

    This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined 
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives.

                 UNFUNDED MANDATES REFORM ACT STATEMENT

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                           EXISTING PROGRAMS

    This bill does not establish or reauthorize a program of 
the federal government known to be duplicative of another 
program.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

               PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL LAW

    Any preemptive effect of this bill over state, local, or 
tribal law is intended to be consistent with the bill's 
purposes and text and the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the 
U.S. Constitution.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

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

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

    Like many of the bills advanced by Committee Democrats 
during this Congress, H.R. 1373 is an ideological and partisan 
bill that will not become law.
    H.R. 1373 would permanently lock up approximately 1 million 
acres of public lands in Northern Arizona. This mistitled and 
misguided land grab solely impacts lands far outside the Grand 
Canyon, and concerns the largest tract of uranium deposits in 
the country.\1\ The uranium that is contained in the area is 
high grade and necessary to help expand the domestic supply of 
uranium.\2\ In 2017, 93 percent of U.S. demand for uranium was 
met by foreign imports, despite a large domestic supply.\3\ 
Making this land permanently out of bounds for mineral 
development is a clear threat to American energy security. This 
is a deeply partisan proposal, and one that exclusively impacts 
lands outside the lead sponsor's district. The majority of the 
mining sites impacted by this legislation are located in 
Congressman Paul Gosar's district. Congressman Gosar has 
expressed very clear opposition to this bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Letter to Secretary Zinke from the Congressional Western Caucus, 
re: Arizona Uranium Mineral Withdrawal. July 27, 2018.
    \2\Roberts, Harold R, Energy Fuels Resource (USA) Inc. Testimony 
for Public Listening Session on ``Government Land Grabs Exposing the 
Truth''. April 11, 2016. https://gosar.house.gov/sites/gosar.house.gov/
files/harold%20r%20roberts%20testimony%20april%2011%202016%20(2).pdf.
    \3\U.S. Energy Information Administration Fact Sheet, ``Nuclear 
Explained.'' https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/
index.php?page=nuclear_where.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This bill would also have significant economic implications 
for the people in Northern Arizona. At the June 5, 2019, 
hearing, the Natural Resources Committee heard testimony from 
Mohave County Supervisor Buster Johnson, whose county contains 
significant portions of the land impacted by this legislation. 
Supervisor Johnson testified that this bill would have a 
negative economic impact on the rural communities in this part 
of Arizona where ``uranium mining would create jobs during a 
time with the economy is in need of a boost.''\4\ There is 
enormous potential for good-paying mining jobs that would be 
made possible by responsible uranium development in this area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Johnson, Buster, Mohave County, Supervisor. Testimony for 
Legislative hearing on H.R. 1373. June 5th, 2019. https://
naturalresources.house.gov/imo/media/doc/Johnson,%20Buster%20-
%20Written%20Testimony.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Arizona produces $6.6 billion in nonfuel minerals, which 
makes it the second largest State in the production of minerals 
for the United States.\5\ Restricting access to parts of a 
mineral-rich State will not only hamper the economic progress 
of the State, but the national security of the United States. 
Furthermore, removing the potential for mining in this area 
would include restrictions on mining on tens of thousands of 
State Trust lands which help fund schools and hospitals in 
Arizona.\6\ Moreover, these million acres would not be the 
federal land in the area to be restricted in some form; in 
fact, including the many other designated federal lands in the 
area, the federal government would be overseeing nearly six 
million acres of land in Arizona, all of which is restricted 
for development and negatively impacts the many rural economies 
in the area.\7\ The Grand Canyon National Park already 
constitutes $329.5 million of the more than $11.5 billion in 
deferred maintenance costs that the National Park System faces; 
increasing the amount of land that the federal government 
manages only exacerbates issues of funding and maintenance.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\U.S. Geological Survey, 2019, Mineral commodity summaries 2019: 
U.S. Geological Survey, 200 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/70202434.
    \6\Atkins, Lisa, Arizona State Land Department, Commissioner. 
Testimony for Public Listening Session on: ``Government Land Grabs: 
Exposing the Truth'' April 11, 2016. https://gosar.house.gov/sites/
gosar.house.gov/files/
lisa%20a.%20atkins,%20arizona%20state%201and%20department,%20commissione
r.pdf.
    \7\Davis, Kurt, Arizona Game and Fish Commission, Chairman. 
Testimony for Public Listening Session on: ``Government Land Grabs 
Exposing the Truth''. April 11, 2016. https://gosar.house.gov/sites/
gosar.house.gov/files/monument-davis%20testimony%20-
april%2011th%20%20kurt%20davis.pdf.
    \8\Hamer, Glenn, Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry. 
Testimony for Public Listening Session on: ``Government Land Grabs 
Exposing the Truth''. April 11, 2016. https://gosar.house.gov/sites/
gosar.house.gov/files/glenn%20hamer%20gcwnm%20written%20testimony.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R. 1373 could also jeopardize water quality in the area. 
A small amount of natural uranium contamination of the Colorado 
River is occurring as a result of erosion, not due to 
mining.\9\ Uranium mining and the requisite reclamation of land 
would benefit the environment and improve water quality. The 
Arizona Geological Survey has published a report showing that 
uranium mining in this part of Arizona will not contaminate the 
Colorado River, the Grand Canyon or any of the surrounding 
watersheds.\10\ Modern mining techniques have been responsibly 
used in this area, and the land has been reclaimed without any 
damage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\Shaw-Norton, Kelly Arizona Mining Association, President. 
Testimony for Public Listening Session on ``Government Land Grabs 
Exposing the Truth''. April 11, 2016. https://gosar.house.gov/sites/
gosar.house.gov/files/
kelly%20norton%20testimony%20for%20field%20hearing.pdfhttps://
gosar.house.gov/sites/gosar.house.gov/files/
tyler%20carlson%20testimony%20(jtc1).pdf.
    \10\Spencer, J.E., and Wenrich, K (n.d.). Breccia-Pipe Uranium 
Mining in the Grand Canyon Region and Implications for Uranium Levels 
in Colorado River Water (Rep.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    During markup of H.R. 3195, several amendments offered by 
Republicans seeking to address flaws in the bill were rejected 
on largely party line votes. Among these was an amendment to 
ensure national security concerns were considered, an amendment 
to exempt lands in Congressman Gosar's district from the bill, 
and a delay until the U.S. begins obtaining 30% of its uranium 
from nonhostile sources. Additional proposed changes at the 
markup included an amendment to ensure that there are no other 
critical minerals that would be locked away in this area to the 
legislation, and another amendment that would have required 
assurance that this legislation would not adversely affect jobs 
available to Native Americans, other minorities, and women. All 
of these amendments were rejected by Committee Democrats, and 
the legislation advanced without a single Republican vote. 
Sadly, like many of the bills advanced by the Majority so far 
this Congress, consideration of this bill wasted the times of 
Members and prevented the consideration of bipartisan 
legislation that would be easily enacted into law if allowed to 
advance.
                                   Rob Bishop.
                                   Don Young.
                                   Paul A. Gosar.
                                   Jody B. Hice.
                                   Bruce Westerman.
                                   Louie Gohmert.
                                   Aumua Amata Coleman Radewagen.
                                   Mike Johnson.

                                  [all]