Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

110th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     110-799

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



 
                    WALNUT CANYON STUDY ACT OF 2008

                                _______
                                

 July 29, 2008.--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

                        [To accompany H.R. 5751]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 5751) to direct the Secretary of the Interior and 
the Secretary of Agriculture to jointly conduct a study of 
certain land adjacent to the Walnut Canyon National Monument in 
the State of Arizona, and for other purposes, having considered 
the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and 
recommend that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 5751 is to direct the Secretary of the 
Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to jointly conduct a 
study of certain land adjacent to the Walnut Canyon National 
Monument in the State of Arizona, and for other purposes.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Designated in 1915, Walnut Canyon National Monument is an 
archaeological park outside Flagstaff, Arizona, that protects 
prehistoric cliff dwellings and their environment. The monument 
encompasses 3,600 acres. It is important to local tribes and is 
a significant tourist destination.
    The close proximity of the monument to the urban Flagstaff 
area may threaten the monument in the future as urban growth 
continues. Local governments have recognized this threat and 
the Coconino County Board of Supervisors and the Flagstaff City 
Council have both passed resolutions calling for a federal 
study to determine the best means of protecting the monument. 
In addition, the recently completed National Park Service 
General Management Plan for the monument includes many of the 
prescriptions called for in this legislation.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 5751 was introduced on April 9, 2008 by Representative 
Ed Pastor (D-AZ). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee 
on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands. On July 10, 2008, 
the Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill during which the 
Administration testified that they did not object to the bill.
    The Subcommittee was discharged from further consideration 
of H.R. 5751 on July 16, 2008 and the Full Natural Resources 
Committee met to consider the bill. The bill was ordered 
favorably reported to the House of Representatives by unanimous 
consent.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 provides that the Act may be cited as the 
``Walnut Canyon Study Act of 2008.''

Section 2. Definitions

    Section 2 defines the ``map'' as the ``Walnut Canyon 
Proposed Study Area'' map dated July 17, 2007; defines the 
``Secretaries'' as the Secretary of the Interior and the 
Secretary of Agriculture; and defines the ``study area'' as the 
area identified on the ``Walnut Canyon Proposed Study Area'' 
map cited above.

Section 3. Study

    Section 3(a) directs the Secretaries to conduct a study to 
assess the suitability and feasibility of designating all or 
part of the study area as an addition to Walnut Canyon National 
Monument, determine if study area lands should continue to be 
managed by the Forest Service, or determine what other 
designation or management options would provide for protection 
of resources within the study area while providing continued 
public access to and use of the study area.
    Section 3(b) directs the Secretaries to provide for public 
comment in the preparation of the study authorized in Section 
3(a) and requires that the Secretaries consult with appropriate 
federal, state and local government entities.
    Section 3(c) requires the Secretaries, within 18 months of 
funds being made available to carry out this act, to submit a 
report to the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of 
Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources of the Senate containing the results of the study and 
the recommendations of the Secretaries.

            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 direct the Secretary of the 
Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to jointly conduct a 
study of certain land adjacent to the Walnut Canyon National 
Monument in the State of Arizona, and for other purposes.
    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. 5751--Walnut Canyon Study Act of 2008

    H.R. 5751 would direct the Department of the Interior (DOI) 
and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to conduct a 
joint study to determine the suitability and feasibility of 
designating certain land as an addition to the Walnut Canyon 
National Monument. Based on information from DOI and USDA and 
assuming the availability of appropriated funds, CBO estimates 
that implementing H.R. 5751 would cost less than $500,000. 
Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending or 
revenues.
    H.R. 5751 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    On August 7, 2007, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 
722, the Walnut Canyon Study Act of 2007, as ordered reported 
by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on July 
25, 2007. The versions of the legislation are similar, and the 
estimated costs are the same.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Tyler Kruzich. 
The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                           EARMARK STATEMENT

    H.R. 5751 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.