99–006

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 107–392

GUNN MCKAY NATURE PRESERVE ACT

APRIL 9, 2002.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of

the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. HANSEN, from the Committee on Resources,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H.R. 3909]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill

(H.R. 3909) to designate certain Federal lands in the State of Utah

as the Gunn McKay Nature Preserve, 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. 3909 is to designate certain Federal lands

in the State of Utah as the Gunn McKay Nature Preserve, and for

other purposes.

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Several years ago, residents of Huntsville, Utah, learned that the

U.S. Forest Service was planning to build a heliport landing area

near the city limits on undeveloped federal land to facilitate fighting wildfires in the surrounding forests. Concerned about helicopters landing and taking off in such close proximity to their

neighborhoods, Huntsville residents proposed to the Forest Service

that this open-space instead be designated as a nature preserve. A

non-profit organization was formed to that end, and the Forest

Service agreed with the residents’ proposal.

H.R. 3909 designates approximately 15 acres of Forest Service

land near Huntsville, Utah, as the Gunn McKay Nature Preserve,

named in the honor of the late Gunn McKay, who served as Utah’s

1st District representative in Congress from 1971 to 1981. The bill

authorizes the Forest Service to work with the city of Huntsville

and the Gunn McKay Nature Preserve Foundation to develop a

2

management plan. The preserve would be managed by the Forest

Service in cooperation with the Gunn McKay Nature Preserve

Foundation.

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 3909 was introduced on March 7, 2002, by Congressman

James V. Hansen (R–UT). The bill was referred to the Committee

on Resources. On March 20, 2002, the Full Resources Committee

met to consider the bill. It was adopted by unanimous consent. The

bill was then ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by voice vote.

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 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. 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:

U.S. CONGRESS,

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE,

Washington, DC, April 1, 2002.

Hon. JAMES V. HANSEN,

Chairman, Committee on Resources,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3909, the Gunn McKay

Nature Preserve Act.

3

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

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Megan Carroll.

Sincerely,

BARRY B. ANDERSON

(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).

Enclosure.

H.R. 3909—Gun McKay Nature Preserve Act

CBO estimates that H.R. 3909 would have no significant impact

on the federal budget. The bill could affect direct spending (including offsetting receipts); therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would

apply, but we estimate that any such impacts would be negligible.

H.R. 3909 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would

have no significant impact on the budgets of state, local, or tribal

governments.

H.R. 3909 would designate 15 acres of federal lands near Huntsville, Utah, as the Gunn McKay Nature Preserve. Subject to valid

existing rights, the bill would withdraw those lands from programs

to develop mineral and geothermal resources. H.R. 3909 would direct the Secretary of Agriculture to develop a management plan for

the proposed preserve in consultation with the city of Huntsville

and the Gunn McKay Nature Preserve Foundation, a nonprofit corporation. The bill would authorize the Secretary to enter into a cooperative agreement with that corporation to manage the preserve.

Based on information from the Forest Service, CBO estimates

that designating the proposed preserve would not significantly affect federal spending. Withdrawing lands within the area from

leasing and development could result in forgone offsetting receipts

from those lands if, under current law, the lands would generate

receipts from those activities. According to the Forest Service, however, those lands currently generate no significant receipts from

such activities, and the agency does not expect them to generate

significant receipts over the next 10 years. Hence, we estimate that

any change sin offsetting receipts under H.R. 3909 would be negligible.

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Megan Carroll. This

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

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