39–006

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ! 1st Session 109–135

DIRECTING THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO CONDUCT A BOUNDARY STUDY TO EVALUATE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE COLONEL JAMES 

BARRETT FARM IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS AND 

THE SUITABILITY AND FEASIBILITY OF ITS INCLUSION IN THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM AS PART OF THE MINUTE MAN NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

JUNE 16, 2005.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. POMBO, from the Committee on Resources, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 394] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 

(H.R. 394) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a 

boundary study to evaluate the significance of the Colonel James 

Barrett Farm in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the suitability and feasibility of its inclusion in the National Park System 

as part of the Minute Man National Historical Park, 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. BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT STUDY. 

(a) DEFINITIONS.—For the purposes of this Act: 

(1) BARRETT’S FARM.—The term ‘‘Barrett’s Farm’’ means the Colonel James 

Barrett Farm listed on the National Register of Historic Places, including the 

house and buildings on the approximately 6 acres of land in Concord, Massachusetts. 

(2) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of the Interior. 

(b) STUDY.—Not later than 2 years after the date that funds are made available 

for this section, the Secretary shall conduct a boundary study to evaluate the significance of Barrett’s Farm in Concord, Massachusetts, as well as the suitability and 

feasibility of its inclusion in the National Park System as part of Minute Man National Historical Park. 

(c) CONTENT OF STUDY.—The study shall include an analysis of the following: 

(1) The significance of Barrett’s Farm in relation to the Revolutionary War. 

(2) Opportunities for public enjoyment of the site as part of the Minute Man 

National Historical Park. 

2

(3) Any operational, management, and private property issues that need to be 

considered if Barrett’s Farm were added to the Minute Man National Historical 

Park. 

(4) A determination of the feasibility of administering Barrett’s Farm considering its size, configuration, ownership, costs, and other factors, as part of 

Minute Man National Historical Park. 

(5) An evaluation of the adequacy of other alternatives for management and 

resource protection of Barrett’s Farm. 

(d) SUBMISSION OF REPORT.—Upon completion of the study, the Secretary shall 

submit a report on the findings of the study to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 394 is to direct the Secretary of the Interior 

to conduct a boundary study to evaluate the significance of the 

Colonel James Barrett Farm in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the suitability and feasibility of its inclusion in the National Park System as part of the Minute Man National Historical 

Park, and for other purposes. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Barrett’s Farm is a five acre parcel listed in the National Register of Historic Places and is recognized as a nationally significant 

site. The farm, once owned by Colonel James Barrett, stored cannons, powder and other munitions during the Revolutionary War. 

The study authorized by this bill would consider the opportunities 

for public enjoyment, operational and management issues, and the 

feasability of administration should Barrett’s Farm be added to 

Minute Man National Historical Park. In addition, the study would 

analyze the role of Barrett’s Farm during the Revolutionary War, 

and other possibilities for management and protection of the area. 

A local conservation organization, Save our Heritage, is leading the 

effort for the preservation of Barrett’s Farm. It has privately financed the purchase of 3.45 acres around the perimeter of the site, 

and is attempting to raise funds to purchase the property’s farmhouse. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 394 was introduced on January 26, 2005, by Congressman 

Martin Meehan (D–MA). The bill was referred to the Committee on 

Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on National Parks. On May 18, 2005, the Full Resources Committee met 

to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on National Parks was discharged from further consideration of the bill by unanimous consent. Congressman Richard Pombo (R–CA) offered an amendment 

in the nature of a substitute that directs the Secretary to consider 

private property issues as part of the boundary expansion study, 

extends the deadline to complete the study from one to two years 

from when funds are made available, and removes the authorization for appropriations. The Pombo amendment was adopted by 

unanimous consent. The bill, as amended, was then favorably reported to the House of Representatives by unanimous consent. 

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 ReVerDate jul 14 2003 06:42 Jun 18, 2005 Jkt 039006 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR135.XXX HR135
3

sources’ 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 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. This bill does not 

authorize funding and therefore, clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the 

Rules of the House of Representatives does not apply. 

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. 394—A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct 

a boundary study to evaluate the significance of the Colonel 

James Barrett Farm in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts 

and the suitability and feasibility of its inclusion in the National Park System as part of the Minute Man National Historical Park, and for other purposes 

H.R. 394 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to study, 

within two years, the suitability and feasibility of adding the Colonel James Barrett Farm to the Minute Man National Historical 

Park in Massachusetts. The proposed study would consider the significance of the farm during the Revolutionary War, opportunities 

for public enjoyment, and other operational and management 

issues. 

Based on information from the National Park Service, CBO estimates that the proposed study would cost less than $100,000 over 

the 2006–2007 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary 

amounts. Enacting H.R. 394 would not affect direct spending or 

revenues. 

H.R. 394 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. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Matthew Pickford. 

This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

4

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

This bill contains no unfunded mandates. 

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.

Æ