69–010 

Calendar No. 140 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 115–104 

FORT ONTARIO STUDY ACT 

JUNE 13, 2017.—Ordered to be printed 

Ms. MURKOWSKI, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 55] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 55) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior 

to conduct a special resource study of Fort Ontario in the State of 

New York, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 

with an amendment in the nature of a substitute and recommends 

that the bill, as amended, do pass. 

The amendment is as follows: 

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the following: 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Fort Ontario Study Act’’. 

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

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

(2) STUDY AREA.—The term ‘‘study area’’ means Fort Ontario in Oswego, New 

York. 

SEC. 3. FORT ONTARIO SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall conduct a special resource study of the 

study area. 

(b) CONTENTS.—In conducting the study under sub-section (a), the Secretary 

shall— 

(1) evaluate the national significance of the study area; 

(2) determine the suitability and feasibility of designating the study area as 

a unit of the National Park System; 

(3) consider other alternatives for preservation, protection, and interpretation 

of the study area by the Federal Government, State or local government entities, or private and nonprofit organizations; 

2 

(4) consult with interested Federal agencies, State or local governmental entities, private and nonprofit organizations, or any other interested individuals; 

and 

(5) identify cost estimates for any Federal acquisition, development, interpretation, operation, and maintenance associated with the alternatives. 

(c) APPLICABLE LAW.—The study required under subsection (a) shall be conducted 

in accordance with section 100507 of title 54, United States Code. 

(d) REPORT.—Not later than 3 years after the date on which funds are first made 

available to carry out the study under subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to 

the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate a report that describes— 

(1) the results of the study; and 

(2) any conclusions and recommendations of the Secretary. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 55 is to authorize the Secretary of the Interior 

to conduct a special resource study of Fort Ontario in the State of 

New York. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

S. 55 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a special 

resource study of Fort Ontario, a military installation in Oswego, 

New York. In conducting the study, the Secretary shall evaluate 

the site’s national significance; determine the suitability and feasibility of designating Fort Ontario as a unit of the National Park 

System; consider other alternatives for preservation, protection, 

and interpretation of the lands by Federal, State, or local governmental entities, or private and nonprofit organizations; consult 

with Federal agencies and interested parties; and identify the cost 

of acquisition and maintenance of alternative National Park Service (NPS) units. 

Fort Ontario was originally built by the British in 1755 to protect 

the area around the east end of Lake Ontario. Located at the 

mouth of the Oswego River in Oswego, New York, Fort Ontario directly overlooks the shores of Lake Ontario. In 1756, the French 

Army destroyed the fort, also known as the ‘‘Fort of the Six Nations.’’ In 1759, the British built a much stronger and larger fort 

on the same site. 

During the American Revolution, the British abandoned Fort Ontario, and in 1778 American troops destroyed the fort. Despite the 

surrender at Yorktown in 1781, the British reoccupied Oswego in 

1782 and rebuilt Fort Ontario for the third time. The British held 

it until 1796, 13 years after the end of the Revolutionary War, before finally turning it and other British forts in the Northwest Territory over to the United States pursuant to the Jay Treaty of 

1795. 

During the War of 1812, British forces captured and destroyed 

the fort. After a period of abandonment, new construction started 

in part due to tensions with Great Britain as well as to check 

smuggling activities between Canada and the United States. Construction of a fourth Fort Ontario commenced in 1839, amidst tensions arising from Canada’s Patriot War. Later, amid fears of British intervention in the Civil War, the United States upgraded defenses of the fort in 1860. 

Fort Ontario later served as a training post from 1903 to 1905, 

a hospital camp during World War I, and a training installation for 

military police and anti-aircraft units in World War II. AdditionVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:12 Jun 14, 2017 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR104.XXX SR104
3 

ally, from August 1944 to February 1946, Fort Ontario operated as 

the nation’s only emergency refugee shelter during World War II 

and housed approximately 982 refugees, predominantly of Jewish 

descent. 

After nearly two hundred years of active military use, the United 

States Army abandoned the fort in 1946 and transferred it to the 

State of New York. In 1953, Fort Ontario opened as a New York 

state historic site. The fort was added to the National Register of 

Historic Places in 1970 and remains open to the public today. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 55 was introduced by Senators Gillibrand and Schumer on 

January 5, 2017. 

A companion measure, H.R. 46, was introduced in the House of 

Representatives by Representatives Katko, Slaughter, and Tenney 

on January 3, 2017, and referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. On January 30, 2017, H.R. 46 was passed by a 

voice vote. H.R. 46 was received in the Senate on January 31, 2017, 

and on March 7, 2017, was referred to the Committee on Energy 

and Natural Resources. 

In the 114th Congress, Senators Gillibrand and Schumer introduced S. 2622 on March 3, 2016. A companion bill, H.R. 4202, was 

introduced in the House of Representatives by Representative 

Katko on December 9, 2015. 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources met in open 

business session on March 30, 2017, and ordered S. 55 and H.R. 

46 favorably reported as amended. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open business session on March 30, 2017, by a majority voice vote of a 

quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 55, if amended as described herein. 

COMMITTEE AMENDMENT

During its consideration of S. 55, the Committee on Energy and 

Natural Resources adopted an amendment in the nature of a substitute to strike the findings and make conforming changes to the 

special resource study language. The amendment is further described in the section-by-section analysis. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

Section 1 contains the short title. 

Section 2. Definitions 

Section 2 contains key definitions. 

Section 3. Fort Ontario special resource study 

Section 3(a) requires the Secretary to conduct a special resource 

study. 

Subsection (b) requires the special resource study to evaluate the 

national significance of the area; determine suitability and feasibility of the study area; consider alternatives provided by stakeVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:12 Jun 14, 2017 Jkt 069006 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR104.XXX SR104
4 

holders; consult with federal, state and local stakeholders; and 

identify costs of alternatives. 

Subsection (c) requires the study to be conducted in accordance 

with 54 U.S.C. 100507. 

Subsection (d) requires the Secretary to submit a report on the 

study to the House Committee on Natural Resources and the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources no later than 

three years after which funds are made available to carry out the 

study. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of the costs of this measure has been provided by the Congressional Budget Office: 

S. 55 would require the National Park Service (NPS) to conduct 

a special resource study of Fort Ontario, a state historic site in 

Oswego, New York. (Fort Ontario was used during the French and 

Indian War, the Revolutionary War, and the War of 1812.) The 

study would determine whether the site meets NPS criteria for inclusion in the National Park System. Based on information provided by the NPS, CBO estimates that implementing the legislation would cost about $250,000; such spending would be subject to 

the availability of appropriated funds. 

Enacting S. 55 would not affect direct spending or revenues; 

therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. CBO estimates 

that enacting S. 55 would not increase net direct spending or onbudget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028. 

S. 55 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates 

as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would not 

affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments. 

On April 7, 2017, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 46, 

the Fort Ontario Study Act, as ordered reported by the Senate 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on March 30,2017. 

The two pieces of legislation are similar and CBO’s estimate of 

their budgetary effects is the same. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jon Sperl. The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION

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

Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following evaluation 

of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in carrying out 

S. 55. The bill is not a regulatory measure in the sense of imposing 

Government-established standards or significant economic responsibilities on private individuals and businesses. 

No personal information would be collected in administering the 

program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal privacy. 

Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the enactment of S. 55, as ordered reported. 

5 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

S. 55, as ordered reported, does not contain any congressionally 

directed spending items, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

Executive Communications on S. 55 were not requested by the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources in the 115th Congress. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no changes in existing law are made by the bill as ordered reported. 

Æ