89–010 

Calendar No. 446 

111TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 111–217 

NATIONAL WOMEN’S HISTORY MUSEUM ACT OF 2009 

JUNE 28, 2010.—Ordered to be printed 

Mrs. BOXER, from the Committee on Environment and Public 

Works, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 1700] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was 

referred the bill (H.R. 1700) to authorize the Administrator of General Services to convey a parcel of real property in the District of 

Columbia to provide for the establishment of a National Women’s 

History Museum, having considered the same, reports favorably 

thereon with amendments and recommends that the bill (as 

amended) do pass. 

PURPOSES OF THE LEGISLATION

H.R. 1700, as amended, authorizes the Administrator of General 

Services to convey a parcel of real property in the District of Columbia to provide for the establishment of a National Women’s History Museum. 

GENERAL STATEMENT AND BACKGROUND

H.R. 1700, as amended, directs the Administrator of General 

Services to sell, at fair market value, real property in southwest 

Washington, DC, commonly known as the ‘‘Cotton Annex’’ site, to 

the National Women’s History Museum, Inc. (NWHM) for the purpose of establishing a museum dedicated to women’s history. The 

site is bounded by 12th Street SW., Independence Ave., the James 

Forrestal Building, and C Street SW. The NWHM is a nonprofit, 

nonpartisan educational institution located in Washington, DC 

with a mission of highlighting, and celebrating historic contributions of women in the United States. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
2 

H.R. 1700 directs the Administrator to convey the property to the 

NWHM at a fair market value of the highest and best use of the 

parcel, as determined by an independent appraisal. The Administrator will commission the appraisal and the NWHM will pay for 

the appraisal. The NWHM will have five years to raise funds to 

construct the museum. If, after five years, the fundraising has not 

been successful, the property will revert back to the Federal Government. The Federal Government’s interest in the parcel is further protected by limiting use of the parcel as a site for the National Women’s History Museum for 99 years. 

The NWHM has been seeking a permanent physical location in 

the Nation’s capital since its inception. According to the NWHM, 

it intends to privately fund the construction of a ‘‘green’’ building 

that will cost between $250 million and $350 million. The costs will 

include design, planning, construction, and two years of operation. 

The permanent museum is expected to be a focal point that will 

have permanent and temporary exhibits, special events, and educational materials that highlight women’s social, political, and intellectual contributions to history. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

Section 1 provides that the short title of the bill is the ‘‘National 

Women’s History Museum Act of 2009’’. 

Sec 2. Definitions 

Section 2 contains definitions for terms used in the bill. 

Sec 3. Conveyance of property 

Section 3 defines the process and standards applicable to the conveyance of the property. 

Subsection (a) directs the Administrator convey the property to 

the Museum on such terms and conditions that the Administrator 

deems reasonable and appropriate to protect the interests of the 

United States. As soon as practicable, but not later than 180 days 

after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator is directed to enter into an agreement with the Museum for the conveyance. The terms and conditions of the agreement shall address, 

among other things, mitigation of developmental impacts to existing Federal buildings and structures, security concerns, and operational protocols for development and use of the property. 

Subsection (b) states that the purchase price for the property 

shall be its fair market value based on its highest and best use as 

determined by an independent appraisal commissioned by the Administrator and paid for by the Museum. The appraisal shall be 

performed by an appraiser mutually acceptable to the Administrator and the Museum. The assumptions, scope of work, and other 

terms and conditions related to the appraisal assignment shall be 

mutually acceptable to the Administrator and the Museum. 

Subsection (c) states the purchase price shall be paid into the 

Federal Buildings Fund established under 40 U.S.C. Sec. 592. 

Subsection (d) states the property shall be conveyed pursuant to 

a quit claim deed. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
3 

Subsection (e) states that the property must be used only as a 

site for a national woman’s history museum for the 99-year period 

beginning on the date of conveyance to the Museum. Subsection (f) states the basis of reversion. The property shall revert to the United States, at the option of the United States, without any obligation for repayment by the United States of any 

amount of the purchase price for the property, if the property is not 

used as a site for a national women’s history museum at any time 

during the 99-year period referred to in subsection (e), or if the Museum has not commenced construction of a women’s history museum in the five-year period beginning on the date of enactment of 

this Act, other than for reasons beyond the control of the Museum, 

as reasonably determined by the Administrator. Subsection (f) also 

grants the Administrator the authority to perform any acts necessary to enforce the reversionary rights provided in this section. 

If any portion of the property reverts to the United States pursuant 

to this section, such property shall be under the custody and control of the Administrator. 

Subsection (g) states that the conveyance pursuant to this Act 

shall occur not later than three years after the date of enactment 

of this Act, though the Administrator may extend this period for 

such time as is reasonably necessary for the Museum to perform 

its obligations. 

Sec 4. Environmental matters 

Subsection (a) states that the Administrator is authorized to contract with the Museum or an affiliate for any needed environmental cleanup of the parcel. 

Subsection (b) states that any costs incurred by the Museum or 

an affiliate for the environmental cleanup of the property will be 

credited to the purchase price for the property. Subsection (c) states that nothing in this Act, or any amendment 

made by this Act, affects or limits the application of or obligation 

to comply with any environmental law, including section 120(h) of 

CERCLA. 

Sec 5. Incidental costs 

Section 5 states that the Museum must pay for all costs associated with complying with the provisions of this Act, including: relocating existing tenants; related studies, reports, surveys; and mitigating impacts to existing Federal buildings and structures. 

Sec 6. Land use approvals 

Subsection (a) states that no portion of the Act should be construed to limit or affect the authority or responsibilities of the National Capital Planning Commission or the Commission of Fine 

Arts. 

Subsection (b) directs the Administrator to cooperate with the 

Museum with respect to any zoning or other land use matter relating to the development of the property in accordance with the Act. 

This cooperation includes consenting to applications by the Museum for applicable zoning and permitting with respect to the property. 

The Administrator is not required to incur any costs with respect 

to cooperation under this section of the bill. 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
4 

Sec 7. Reports 

Section 7 states that the Museum must produce an annual report, starting not later than one year after the date of enactment 

of this Act until the end of the five-year period following conveyance of the property or until substantial completion of the museum 

facility (whichever is later), to the Administrator and the Committees. The report is required to detail the development and construction activities of the Museum. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

In the 108th and 109th Congresses, bills were introduced to con- vey the ‘‘Pavilion Annex’’ of the Old Post Office Building to the National Women’s History Museum. See S. 1741, S. 501, and H.R. 

1429. S. 1741 and S. 501 passed the Senate on November 21, 2003, 

and July 29, 2005, respectively. No further action was taken on the 

bills. 

In the 110th Congress, Representative Carolyn Maloney intro- duced H.R. 6548, the ‘‘General Services Administration Portfolio 

Enhancement Act of 2008’’, on July 17, 2008. H.R. 6548 would convey the Cotton Annex property in Southwest, Washington, DC, to 

the National Women’s History Museum. No further action was 

taken on the bill. On July 20, 2007, Senator Susan Collins introduced S. 1841, the ‘‘National Women’s History Museum Act of 

2007’’. No further action was taken on the bill. 

In the 111th Congress, Representative Carolyn Maloney introduced H.R. 1700, the ‘‘National Women’s History Museum Act of 

2009’’, on March 25, 2009. The House Committee on Transportation 

and Infrastructure, to whom was referred H.R. 1700, reported the 

bill, as amended, on October 8, 2009. H.R. 1700 passed the House 

on October 14, 2009. 

ROLLCALL VOTES

On April 21, 2010, the Committee on Environment and Public 

Works met and considered H.R. 1700. The Committee adopted by 

voice vote an amendment to the bill that made technical changes 

to the text and clarified the bill’s intent to ensure consistency with 

existing laws. The Committee on Environment and Public Works 

ordered H.R. 1700, as amended, reported favorably to the Senate 

by voice vote with a quorum present. There were no rollcall votes 

taken in Committee on this bill. 

REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

In compliance with section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes evaluation of the regulatory impact of the reported bill. The Committee finds that this 

legislation, which authorizes the transfer of federal property for 

purposes of a national women’s history museum, does not have 

substantial regulatory impacts. 

MANDATES ASSESSMENT

In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Pub. L. 104–4), the Committee finds that this legislation does not 

impose intergovernmental mandates or private sector mandates as 

those terms are defined in UMRA. The Congressional Budget Office 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
5 

1The net deficit effects over the 2010–2014 period and over the 2010–2019 period are relevant 

for the purposes of enforcing the current pay-as-you-go rules in the Senate and the House of 

Representatives. CBO estimates that the net impact would be zero over both of those periods. 

concurs, finding ‘‘H.R. 1700 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.’’ 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

APRIL 28, 2010. 

Hon. BARBARA BOXER, Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MADAM CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has 

prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1700, the National 

Women’s History Museum Act of 2009. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Matthew Pickford. 

Sincerely, 

DOUGLAS W. ELMENDORF. 

Enclosure. 

H.R. 1700—National Women’s History Museum Act of 2009 

Summary: H.R. 1700 would direct the General Services Administration (GSA) to sell a piece of federal property located in Washington, D.C., to the National Women’s History Museum, Inc. (a 

nonprofit corporation). 

CBO estimates that this conveyance would not have a significant 

net impact on the federal budget over the next five years. Enacting 

H.R. 1700 could affect direct spending; therefore, pay-as-you-go 

procedures would apply to the legislation, but CBO estimates that 

any effects would not be significant.1 Enacting H.R. 1700 would not 

affect revenues. 

H.R. 1700 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. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 1700 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 800 (general government). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2010– 

2015 

2010– 

2020 

CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING 

Sale of Property: 

Estimated 

Budget Authority .......... 0 0 0 ·50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ·50 ·50 

Estimated Outlays .............. 0 0 0 ·50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ·50 ·50 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
6 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2010– 

2015 

2010– 

2020 

Spending of Sales 

Proceeds by GSA: 

Estimated 

Budget Authority .......... 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 

Estimated Outlays .............. 0 0 0 38 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 50 50 

Total Changes: 

Estimated 

Budget 

Authority ....... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Estimated 

Outlays 0 0 0 ·12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 

1700 will be enacted in 2010 and that spending will follow historical patterns for the repair and maintenance of GSA facilities. 

H.R. 1700 would authorize the sale of a federal property near the James Forrestal building, in southwest Washington, D.C. The legislation would direct GSA to complete the conveyance within three 

years. A condition of the sale is that the property would be used 

as the site for a new museum. Under H.R. 1700, the property 

would revert to the federal government if the corporation uses it 

for any unauthorized proposes or fails to commence work on the 

museum within five years after enactment of H.R. 1700. Any net 

proceeds from the sale could be spent by GSA to repair and maintain other facilities without further appropriation. 

Under current law, GSA can transfer surplus federal property to public entities at little or no cost to a recipient for certain purposes 

(such as use by another federal or local government agency) before 

offering the property for sale. Any cash payments resulting from 

public sales are deposited in the Treasury as offsetting receipts (a 

credit against direct spending). GSA currently controls the property 

near the James Forrestal building, which consists primarily of a 

small parking lot; the agency reports that it has no plans to declare 

the property excess to its needs. Thus, CBO does not expect that 

the property would be conveyed for a public purpose or sold over 

the next 10 years under current law. An assessment of the property’s value has not been completed and would depend on a variety of factors, including the property’s 

highest and best use, zoning restrictions, and a final land survey. 

Based on recent property sales in the District, CBO estimates that 

proceeds from this sale would probably total less than $60 million. Under the legislation, any costs to correct environmental con- tamination of the property would be deducted from the sales price. 

CBO expects that GSA would spend the remaining proceeds (about 

$50 million) from the sale to maintain and renovate other federal 

facilities. Because GSA has a considerable backlog of such projects, 

we estimate that there would be no significant net budgetary impact from enacting legislation over both the 2010–2015 and 2010– 

2020 periods. 

Pay-As-You-Go Considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act 

of 2010 establishes budget reporting and enforcement procedures 

for legislation affecting direct spending or revenues. H.R. 1700 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS
7 

could affect direct spending from the sale of property (a credit 

against direct spending) and the spending of those receipts. The 

net changes in the deficit that are subject to those pay-as-you-go 

procedures are shown in the following table. 

CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR H.R. 1700, THE NATIONAL WOMEN’S HISTORY 

MUSEUM ACT OF 2009, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS ON APRIL 21, 2010. 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2010– 

2015 

2010– 

2020 

NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (·) IN THE DEFICIT 

Statutory Pay-As-YouGo Impact ............. 0 0 0 ·12 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 1700 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA and would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal 

governments. 

Previous CBO estimate: On October 7, 2009, CBO transmitted a 

cost estimate for H.R. 1700 as ordered reported by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on September 24, 

2009. The two pieces of legislation are similar and their estimated 

costs are the same. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Matthew Pickford; Impact 

on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Elizabeth Cove Delisle; 

Impact on the Private Sector: Paige Piper/Bach. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Assistant Director for 

Budget Analysis. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

Section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate requires the committee to publish changes in existing law made by 

the bill as reported. Passage of this bill will make no changes to 

existing law. 

fi 


smartinez on DSKB9S0YB1PROD with REPORTS