```

[House Report 107-653]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

107th Congress                                            Rept. 107-653
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                      Part 1
======================================================================
 
              GATEWAY COMMUNITIES COOPERATION ACT OF 2002

                                _______
                                

               September 11, 2002.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Hansen, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 4622]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 4622) to require Federal land managers to support, and to 
communicate, coordinate, and cooperate with, designated gateway 
communities, to improve the ability of gateway communities to 
participate in Federal land management planning conducted by 
the Forest Service and agencies of the Department of the 
Interior, and to respond to the impacts of the public use of 
the Federal lands administered by these agencies, 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. SHORT TITLE.

  This Act may be cited as the ``Gateway Communities Cooperation Act of 
2002''.

SEC. 2. IMPROVED RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FEDERAL LAND MANAGERS AND GATEWAY 
                    COMMUNITIES TO SUPPORT COMPATIBLE LAND MANAGEMENT 
                    OF BOTH FEDERAL AND ADJACENT LANDS.

  (a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
          (1) Communities that are adjacent to or near Federal lands, 
        including units of the National Park System, units of the 
        National Wildlife Refuge System, units of the National Forest 
        System, and lands administered by the Bureau of Land 
        Management, are vitally impacted by the management and public 
        use of these Federal lands.
          (2) These communities, commonly known as gateway communities, 
        fulfill an integral part in the mission of the Federal lands by 
        providing necessary services, such as schools, roads, search 
        and rescue, emergency, medical, provisioning, logistical 
        support, living quarters, and drinking water and sanitary 
        systems, for both visitors to the Federal lands and employees 
        of Federal land management agencies.
          (3) Provision of these vital services by gateway communities 
        is an essential ingredient for a meaningful and enjoyable 
        experience by visitors to the Federal lands because Federal 
        land management agencies are unable to provide, or are 
        prevented from providing, these services.
          (4) Gateway communities serve as an entry point for persons 
        who visit the Federal lands and are ideal for establishment of 
        visitor services, including lodging, food service, fuel and 
        auto repairs, emergency services, and visitor information.
          (5) Development in these gateway communities affect the 
        management and protection of these Federal lands, depending on 
        the extent to which advance planning for the local development 
        is coordinated between the communities and Federal land 
        managers.
          (6) The planning and management decisions of Federal land 
        managers can have unintended consequences for gateway 
        communities and the Federal lands, when the decisions are not 
        adequately communicated to, or coordinated with, the elected 
        officials and residents of gateway communities.
          (7) Experts in land management planning are available to 
        Federal land managers, but persons with technical planning 
        skills are often not readily available to gateway communities, 
        particularly small gateway communities.
          (8) Gateway communities are often affected by the policies 
        and actions of several Federal land agencies and both the 
        communities and the agencies would benefit from greater 
        interagency coordination of those policies and actions.
          (9) Persuading gateway communities to make decisions and 
        undertake actions in their communities that would also be in 
        the best interest of the Federal lands is most likely to occur 
        when such decisionmaking and actions are built upon a 
        foundation of cooperation and coordination.
  (b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this Act to require Federal land 
managers to communicate, coordinate, and cooperate with gateway 
communities in order to--
          (1) improve the relationships among Federal land managers, 
        elected officials, and residents of gateway communities;
          (2) enhance the facilities and services in gateway 
        communities available to visitors to Federal lands, when 
        compatible with the management of these lands; and
          (3) result in better local land use planning and decisions by 
        Federal land managers.
  (c) Definitions.--In this section:
          (1) Gateway community.--The term ``gateway community'' means 
        a county, city, town, village, or other subdivision of a State, 
        or a federally recognized American Indian tribe or Alaska 
        Native village, that--
                  (A) is incorporated or recognized in a county or 
                regional land use plan; and
                  (B) a Federal land manager (or the head of the 
                tourism office for the State) determines is 
                significantly affected economically, socially, or 
                environmentally by planning and management decisions 
                regarding Federal lands administered by that Federal 
                land manager.
          (2) Federal land agencies.--The term ``Federal land 
        agencies'' means the National Park Service, United States 
        Forest Service, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and 
        the Bureau of Land Management.
          (3) Federal land manager.--The term ``Federal land manager'' 
        means--
                  (A) the superintendent of a unit of the National Park 
                System;
                  (B) the manager of a national wildlife refuge;
                  (C) the field office manager of a Bureau of Land 
                Management area; or
                  (D) the supervisor of a unit of the National Forest 
                System.
  (d) Participation in Federal Planning and Land Use.--
          (1) Participation in planning.--The Federal land agencies 
        shall provide for meaningful public involvement at the earliest 
        possible time by elected and appointed officials of governments 
        of local gateway communities in the development of land use 
        plans, programs, land use regulations, land use decisions, 
        transportation plans, general management plans, and any other 
        plans, decisions, projects, or policies for Federal public 
        lands under the jurisdiction of these agencies that will have a 
        significant impact on these gateway communities. To facilitate 
        such involvement, the Federal land agencies shall provide these 
        officials, at the earliest possible time, with a summary in 
        nontechnical language of the assumptions, purposes, goals, and 
        objectives of such a plan, decision, project, or policy and a 
        description of any anticipated significant impact of the plan, 
        decision, or policy on gateway communities.
          (2) Early notice of proposed decisions.--To the extent 
        practicable, the Federal land agencies shall provide local 
        gateway communities with early public notice of proposed 
        decisions of these agencies that may have a significant impact 
        on gateway communities.
          (3) Training sessions.--The Federal land agencies shall offer 
        training sessions for elected and appointed officials of 
        gateway communities at which such officials can obtain a better 
        understanding of--
                  (A) agency planning processes; and
                  (B) the methods by which they can participate most 
                meaningfully in the development of the agency plans, 
                decisions, and policies referred to in paragraph (1).
          (4) Technical assistance.--At the request of the government 
        of a gateway community, a Federal land agency shall assign, to 
        the extent practicable, an agency employee or contractor to 
        work with the community to develop data and analysis relevant 
        to the preparation of agency plans, decisions, and policies 
        referred to in paragraph (1).
          (5) Review of federal land management planning.--At the 
        request of a gateway community, and to the extent practicable, 
        a Federal land manager shall assist the gateway community to 
        conduct a review of land use, management, or transportation 
        plans of the Federal land manager likely to affect the gateway 
        community.
          (6) Coordination of land use.--To the extent consistent with 
        the laws governing the administration of the Federal public 
        lands, a Federal land manager may enter into a cooperative 
        agreement with a gateway community to provide for coordination 
        between--
                  (A) the land use inventory, planning, and management 
                activities for the Federal lands administered by the 
                Federal land manager; and
                  (B) the land use planning and management activities 
                of other Federal agencies, agencies of the State in 
                which the Federal lands are located, and local and 
                tribal governments in the vicinity of the Federal 
                lands.
          (7) Interagency cooperation and coordination.--To the extent 
        practicable, when the plans and activities of two or more 
        Federal land agencies are anticipated to have a significant 
        impact on a gateway community, the Federal land agencies 
        involved shall consolidate and coordinate their plans and 
        planning processes to facilitate the participation of the 
        gateway community in the planning processes.
          (8) Treatment as cooperating agencies.--When a proposed 
        action is determined to require the preparation of an 
        environmental impact statement, the Federal land agencies 
        shall, as soon as practicable, but not later than the scoping 
        process, actively solicit the participation of gateway 
        communities as cooperating agencies under the National 
        Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
  (e) Grants To Assist Gateway Communities.--
          (1) Grants authorized; purposes.--A Federal land manager may 
        make grants to an eligible gateway community to enable the 
        gateway community--
                  (A) to participate in Federal land planning or 
                management processes;
                  (B) to obtain professional land use or transportation 
                planning assistance necessary as a result of Federal 
                action;
                  (C) to address and resolve public infrastructure 
                impacts that are identified through these processes as 
                a likely result of the Federal land management 
                decisions and for which sufficient funds are not 
                otherwise available; and
                  (D) to provide public information and interpretive 
                services about the Federal lands administered by the 
                Federal land manager and the gateway community.
          (2) Eligible gateway communities.--To be eligible for a grant 
        under this subsection, a gateway community may not have a 
        population in excess of 10,000 persons.
  (f) Funding Sources.--
          (1) General agency funds.--A Federal land agency may use 
        amounts available for the general operation of the agency to 
        provide funds to Federal land managers of that agency to make 
        grants under subsection (e).
          (2) Other planning or project development funds.--Funds 
        available to a Federal land manager for planning, construction, 
        or project development may also be used to fund programs under 
        subsection (d) and make grants under subsection (e).
          (3) Combination of funds.--Federal land managers from 
        different Federal land agencies may combine financial resources 
        to make grants under subsection (e).

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 4622 is to require federal land 
managers to support, and to communicate, coordinate, and 
cooperate with, designated gateway communities, to improve the 
ability of gateway communities to participate in federal land 
management planning conducted by the Forest Service and 
agencies of the Department of the Interior, and to respond to 
the impacts of the public use of the federal lands administered 
by these agencies, and for other purposes.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Communities that are adjacent to units of the National Park 
System, National Wildlife Refuge System, National Forest System 
and other units of our federal lands play a key role in 
ensuring the successful management and maintenance of federal 
lands, as well as helping to meet the public's expectations for 
their use and enjoyment of these lands. The policies and 
decisions made by federal land agencies can have a very 
significant impact on ``gateway communities''. Moreover, 
visitors to federal lands and employees of federal land 
management agencies generally rely on the critical services and 
infrastructure provided for and maintained by these 
communities. These necessary services include schools, roads, 
search and rescue, emergency and medical support, and drinking 
water and sanitary systems.
    There are many examples in which cooperation and 
coordination between federal land agencies and gateway 
communities have resulted in wise planning, good policy 
choices, and real environmental benefits. However, it has also 
often been the case that poor policy choices have been the 
result, at least in part, of the failure to coordinate and 
cooperate with gateway communities from the earliest stages of 
planning. While this legislation would not allow gateway 
communities to prevent agencies from taking whatever actions 
they have the authority to take, it would ensure more informed 
federal decision making, as well as enable locally elected 
officials and decision makers to have an early and accurate 
understanding of the goals, aims, and assumptions of the 
agencies.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 4622 was introduced on April 30, 2002, by Congressman 
George Radanovich (R-CA). The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Resources and additionally to the Committee on 
Agriculture. Within the Committee on Resources the bill was 
referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and 
Public Lands, the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health and 
the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and 
Oceans. On May 7, 2002, the Subcommittee on National Parks, 
Recreation, and Public Lands held a hearing on the bill. On 
July 18, 2002, that Subcommittee met to mark up the bill. No 
amendments were offered and the bill was ordered favorably 
reported to the Full Committee by voice vote. On July 24, 2002, 
the Full Resources Committee met to consider the bill. The 
Subcommittee on Forest and Forest Health and the Subcommittee 
on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans were discharged 
from further consideration of the bill by unanimous consent. 
Mr. Radanovich offered an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute to: incorporate federally recognized Indian tribes 
and Alaska Native Villages into the definition of a gateway 
community; revise language regarding the federal land 
management agencies' ability to actively solicit the 
participation of gateway communities as ``cooperating 
agencies'' under the National Environmental Policy Act; and to 
make other minor and technical changes. The amendment was 
adopted by voice vote and the bill, as amended, 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, September 4, 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. 4622, the Gateway 
Communities Cooperation Act of 2002.
    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. 4622--Gateway Communities Cooperation Act of 2002

    Summary: H.R. 4622 would require federal land management 
agencies to take certain steps to promote the involvement of 
local communities in federal land-use planning. CBO estimates 
that implementing H.R. 4622 would cost $50 million over the 
2003-2007 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary 
amounts. The bill would not affect direct spending or receipts; 
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
    H.R. 4622 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments. Enacting this bill could benefit those local 
governments considered gateway communities.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: For this 
estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 4622 will be enacted near the 
start of fiscal year 2002 and that necessary funds will be 
provided near the start of each fiscal year. Estimates of 
outlays are based on historical spending patterns for similar 
activities. The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 4622 is 
shown in the following table. The costs of this legislation 
fall within budget function 300 (natural resources and 
environment).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
                                                                       2003     2004     2005     2006     2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Estimated Authorization Level......................................        5        8       10       12       15
Estimated Outlays..................................................        5        8       10       12       15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Basis of estimate: H.R. 4622 would require federal land 
management agencies to take certain steps to involve gateway 
communities--local or tribal governments that are significantly 
affected by planning and management decisions regarding federal 
lands--in federal land-use planning. According to the 
Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture, 
under current law, federal land management agencies generally 
meet many of the bill's requirements to involve gateway 
communities in planning processes. Thus, CBO estimates that 
formalizing those requirements would not significantly affect 
those agencies' costs.
    H.R. 4622 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior and 
the Secretary of Agriculture to make grants to small gateway 
communities for the costs of participating in federal planning 
processes, planning and implementing certain transportation and 
infrastructure projects, and providing public information about 
nearby federal lands. Because the secretaries do not have 
authority to make such grants under current law, CBO expects 
that providing such assistance would require additional 
appropriations. Based on information from federal land 
management agencies about the number of gateway communities 
that might be eligible for grants under H.R. 4622, we estimate 
that such grants would average $250,000 per community and that 
about 200 communities would receive such grants over the next 
five years for a total cost of about $50 million, assuming 
appropriation of the necessary amounts.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 4622 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or 
tribal governments. Enacting this bill could benefit those 
local governments considered gateway communities.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Megan Carroll; Impact 
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie Miller; and 
Impact on the Private Sector: Lauren Marks.
    Estimate 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.

                        COMMITTEE CORRESPONDENCE

                     U.S. House of Representatives,
                                    Committee on Resources,
                                Washington, DC, September 10, 2002.
Hon. Larry Combest,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, Longworth House Office Building, 
        Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I ask your cooperation to help schedule 
an early consideration by the House of Representatives of H.R. 
4622, to require federal land managers to support, and to 
communicate, coordinate, and cooperate with, designated gateway 
communities, to improve the ability of gateway communities to 
participate in federal land management planning conducted by 
the Forest Service and agencies of the Department of the 
Interior, and to respond to the impacts of the public use of 
the federal lands administered by these agencies, and for other 
purposes.
    H.R. 4622 was referred primarily to the Committee on 
Resources and additionally to your Committee. The Subcommittee 
on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands held a hearing 
on the bill on May 7, 2002. The Committee on Resources ordered 
the bill reported with an amendment on July 24, 2002, by voice 
vote. I have forwarded a copy of the reported text of the bill 
to your staff for review.
    Because of the small number of days remaining in the 107th 
Congress, and because of the importance of this bill to its 
author, Congressman George Radanovich, I ask that you allow the 
Committee on Agriculture to be discharged from further 
consideration of this bill to expedite Floor scheduling. Of 
course, this action would not be considered as precedent for 
any future referrals of similar measures. Moreover, if the bill 
is conferenced with the Senate, I would support naming 
Agriculture Committee members to the conference committee. I 
would also be pleased to include this letter and your response 
in the report on H.R. 4622.
    Mr. Chairman, I have been very pleased with the tremendous 
degree of cooperation between our two Committees this Congress 
on the many bills which affect our national forests. Your staff 
has been responsive and thoughtful, and my staff very much 
appreciates their support and teamwork. I hope that you will 
give my request serious consideration and I look forward to 
your response.
            Sincerely,
                                           James V. Hansen,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                     U.S. House of Representatives,
                                  Committee on Agriculture,
                                Washington, DC, September 11, 2002.
Hon. James V. Hansen,
Chairman, Committee on Resources, Longworth House Office Building, 
        Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for forwarding a draft copy of 
H.R. 4622, the Gateway Communities Cooperation Act of 2002, as 
ordered reported by your Committee on July 24, 2002.
    Under clause 1(a) of Rule X, the Committee on Agriculture 
has jurisdiction over bills relating to forestry in general and 
forest reserves other than those created from the public 
domain. In exercising this jurisdiction, the Committee on 
Agriculture has worked cooperatively in the past with your 
Committee regarding general matters relating to forestry.
    Aware of your interest in expediting this legislation, and 
after conferring with Chairman Goodlatte of the Subcommittee on 
Departmental Operations, Oversight, Nutrition, and Forestry, I 
will be glad to waive further consideration of this measure so 
as to allow its timely consideration by the entire House of 
Representatives during the remainder of the 107th Congress.
    This action is not intended to waive this Committee's 
jurisdiction over this matter for all purposes, and in the 
event a conference with the Senate is requested, I would 
appreciate your support in the naming of members from the 
Committee on Agriculture to the conference committee.
    Thank you once again for the extraordinary cooperation this 
Congress in which our respective Committees have worked 
together and I look forward to working with you in the future 
on matters of shared jurisdiction.
            Sincerely,
                                             Larry Combest,
                                                          Chairman.

                                

```