19–006 

112TH CONGRESS REPT. 112–526, " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session Part 1 

PRESERVING ACCESS TO CAPE HATTERAS NATIONAL 

SEASHORE RECREATIONAL AREA ACT 

JUNE 15, 2012.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of 

the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. HASTINGS of Washington, from the Committee on Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

together with 

DISSENTING VIEWS 

[To accompany H.R. 4094] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 

bill (H.R. 4094) to authorize pedestrian and motorized vehicular access in Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area, 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. 4094 is to authorize pedestrian and motorized vehicular access in Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

H.R. 4094 directs the Secretary of the Interior to manage Cape 

Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area in accordance with 

the Interim Protected Species Management Strategy/Environmental Assessment issued by the National Park Service (NPS) on 

June 13, 2007. 

Authorized in 1937, Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreation 

Area now covers 30,350 acres. In 2007, the NPS instituted an Interim Management Strategy to govern off-road vehicle (ORV) use 

at Cape Hatteras. The access restrictions it contained were much 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

more limiting than visitors and local residents were accustomed, 

but there was general agreement that the strategy was functional. 

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a Biological Opinion 

finding that Interim Management Strategy would not jeopardize 

any Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed species. However, litigious interest groups sued the NPS over the adoption of the Interim Management Strategy and, in April 2008, the court approved 

a settlement that resulted in a consent decree establishing new, 

more restrictive rules on ORV use at Hatteras until a new final 

rule could be crafted. That final rule, which is even more restrictive 

than the consent decree, went into effect in March 2012. 

Local businesses have reported significant economic losses and 

expect to lose more business as the season continues. ORVs have 

long been used to access the park by fisherman and other visitors. 

By restricting long sections of the beach from ORV use and leaving 

no alternatives, NPS has effectively shut down more miles of the 

park than the NPS represents. 

H.R. 4094 would suspend the consent decree and the final rule 

and reinstate the Interim Management Strategy. It lays out a list 

of criteria that the Secretary of the Interior would have to meet to 

institute access restrictions greater than those in the Interim Management Strategy. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 4094 was introduced on February 28, 2012, by Congressman 

Walter Jones (R–NC). The bill was referred primarily to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on 

the Judiciary. Within the Committee on Natural Resources, the bill 

was referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and 

Public Lands. On April 27, 2012, the Subcommittee held a hearing 

on the bill. On June 7, 2012, the Full Natural Resources Committee met to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on National 

Parks, Forests and Public Lands was discharged by unanimous 

consent. No amendments were offered and the bill was then adopted and ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives 

by a roll call vote of 24–18, as follows: 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTSInsert offset folio 3 here HR526P1.001
4 

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. 

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(1) 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)(2)(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. 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. 4094—Preserving Access to Cape Hatteras National Seashore 

Recreational Area Act 

H.R. 4094 would require the Cape Hatteras National Seashore in 

North Carolina to be managed according to the Interim Protected 

Species Management Strategy/Environmental Assessment (Interim 

Strategy) issued by the National Park Service (NPS) on June 13, 

2007, until the NPS issues a new final rule. Under the bill, that 

final rule cannot include additional restrictions on pedestrian or 

motorized access to the seashore beyond those in the Interim Strategy unless the restrictions are based on peer-reviewed science and 

the public has had the opportunity to review and comment on 

them. 

H.R. 4094 would prohibit implementation of the existing final 

rule entitled ‘‘Special Regulations, Areas of the National Park System, Cape Hatteras National SeashoreOff—Road Vehicle Management’’ and would invalidate the consent decree concerning use of 

off-road vehicles at the seashore, which was filed on April 30, 2008. 

Based on information provided by the NPS, CBO estimates that 

the legislation would have no significant impact on the federal 

budget over the 2013–2017 period. Management of the seashore 

under the Interim Strategy would not require significant changes 

in NPS operations regarding the seashore. 

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 4094 would affect direct 

spending; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. Under the existing final rule, the NPS will charge fees (which are recorded in 

the budget as offsetting receipts) for off-road vehicle permits. Those 

fees would be available to be spent at the seashore without further 

appropriation. Those fees are not a part of the Interim Strategy; 

therefore, under the bill, the NPS would not collect or spend those 

fees. CBO estimates that the net impact of that change would not 

be significant. Enacting H.R. 4094 would not affect revenues. 

H.R. 4094 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
5 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Martin von Gnechten. 

The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

2. Section 308(a) of 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. Based on information provided by the National 

Park Service, CBO estimates that the legislation would have no 

significant impact on the federal budget over the 2013–2017 period. 

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 authorize pedestrian and motorized vehicular access in Cape Hatteras National Seashore Recreational Area. 

EARMARK STATEMENT

This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, limited 

tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined under clause 9(e), 

9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

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. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 

Washington, DC, June 14, 2012. 

Hand-delivered. 

Hon. DOC HASTINGS, Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources, 

Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC. 

DEAR CHAIRMAN HASTINGS: I am writing with respect to H.R. 

4094, the ‘‘Preserving Access to Cape Hatteras National Seashore 

Recreational Area Act,’’ which the Committee on Natural Resources 

reported favorably on June 7, 2012. As a result of your having consulted with us on provisions in H.R. 4094 that fall within the Rule 

X jurisdiction of the Committee on the Judiciary, I agree to discharge our Committee from further consideration of this bill so that 

it may proceed expeditiously to the House floor for consideration. 

The Judiciary Committee takes this action with our mutual understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 4094 at this 

time, we do not waive any jurisdiction over subject matter contained in this or similar legislation, and that our Committee will 

be appropriately consulted and involved as the bill or similar legislation moves forward so that we may address any remaining issues 

in our jurisdiction. Our Committee also reserves the right to seek 

appointment of an appropriate number of conferees to any HouseVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:58 Jun 16, 2012 Jkt 019006 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR526P1.XXX HR526P1

jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
6 

Senate conference involving this or similar legislation, and asks 

that you support any such request. 

I would appreciate a response to this letter confirming this understanding with respect to H.R. 4094, and would ask that a copy 

of our exchange of letters on this matter be included in the Congressional Record during floor consideration of H.R. 4094. 

Sincerely, 

LAMAR SMITH, Chairman. 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES, 

Washington, DC, June 14, 2012. 

Hon. LAMAR SMITH, 

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, 

Rayburn HOB, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you for your letter regarding H.R. 

4094, the Preserving Access to Cape Hatteras National Seashore 

Recreational Area Act. As you know, the Committee on Natural Resources ordered reported the bill on June 7, 2012. I appreciate your 

support in bringing this legislation before the House of Representatives, and accordingly, understand that the Committee on the Judiciary will forego action on the bill. 

The Committee on Natural Resources concurs with the mutual 

understanding that by foregoing consideration of H.R. 4094 at this 

time, the Committee on the Judiciary does not waive any jurisdiction over the subject matter contained in this or similar legislation. 

In addition, should a conference on the bill be necessary, I would 

support your request to have the Committee on the Judiciary represented on the conference committee. Finally, I would be pleased 

to include your letter and this response in the bill report filed by 

the Committee on Natural Resources, as well as in the Congressional Record during floor consideration, to memorialize our understanding. 

Thank you for your cooperation. 

Sincerely, 

DOC HASTINGS, Chairman. 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
(7) 

DISSENTING VIEWS 

Cape Hatteras National Seashore, on the Outer Banks of North 

Carolina, includes more than 30,000 acres of barrier islands. Established in 1937 and managed by the National Park Service (NPS), 

Cape Hatteras is the nation’s first national seashore. 

In 2007, the NPS completed an interim environmental review to 

assess whether motorized vehicle use on the beaches was endangering public safety or impacting threatened and endangered nesting shorebirds and sea turtles found in the Park. In 2008, the NPS 

was sued by groups alleging that the management plan put in 

place as a result of the 2007 process was woefully inadequate to 

protect those species. 

Parties to the lawsuit, including the local counties who intervened in the case, eventually signed a consent decree providing for 

temporary management of the Seashore and protection for the imperiled species, until the NPS could complete a full environmental 

impact statement and final rule. The final rule was published in 

January and became effective February 15 of this year. 

It is important to note that, despite the fact that the consent decree and final rule placed certain limits on motorized beach access, 

the numbers of park visitors, piping plovers and turtle hatchlings 

have all increased in recent years. Off-road vehicle use is still allowed in the park, albeit on fewer acres and at different times of 

the year. 

H.R. 4094 would overturn the new rule, revert Park management 

to the 2007 plan and limit the effectiveness of any future rule. The 

legislation flies in the face of sound science, responsible rule-making and legitimate efforts to balance the competing demands placed 

on the Seashore’s resources. The bill represents Congressional 

micro-management of a specific unit of the National Park System 

to the detriment of the Park. H.R. 4094 is an unwarranted intrusion on behalf of small but aggressive segment of the public who 

demand expansive access for off-road vehicles regardless of the impacts. 

A far larger majority of the public supports the final rule; their 

wishes and the solid scientific work of the NPS and the courts 

should be respected. H.R. 4094 should be rejected. 

EDWARD J. MARKEY. 

RAU ́ L M. GRIJALVA. 

Æ 


jbell on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with REPORTS