79–006

106TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 106–647

SAN RAFAEL WESTERN LEGACY DISTRICT AND NATIONAL

CONSERVATION ACT

JUNE 6, 2000.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of

the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

together with

DISSENTING VIEWS

[To accompany H.R. 3605]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill

(H.R. 3605) to establish the San Rafael Western Legacy District in

the State of Utah, 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 out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof

the following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘San Rafael Western Legacy District and National

Conservation Act’’.

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:

(1) CONSERVATION AREA.—The term ‘‘Conservation Area’’ means the San

Rafael National Conservation Area established by section 201.

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

(3) WESTERN LEGACY DISTRICT.—The term ‘‘Western Legacy District’’ means

the San Rafael Western Legacy District established by section 101.

TITLE I—SAN RAFAEL WESTERN LEGACY DISTRICT

SEC. 101. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SAN RAFAEL WESTERN LEGACY DISTRICT.

(a) IN GENERAL.—In order to promote the preservation, conservation, interpretation, scientific research, and development of the historical, cultural, natural, recreational, archeological, paleontological, environmental, biological, educational, wilVerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:07 Jun 07, 2000 Jkt 079006 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR647.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR647
2

derness, and scenic resources of the San Rafael region of the State of Utah, as well

as the economic viability of rural communities in the region, there is hereby established the San Rafael Western Legacy District, to include the San Rafael National

Conservation Area established by section 201.

(b) AREAS INCLUDED.—The Western Legacy District shall consist of approximately

2,842,800 acres of land in the County of Emery, Utah, as generally depicted on the

map entitled ‘‘San Rafael Western Legacy District and National Conservation Area’’

and dated lllll.

(c) MAP AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION.—As soon as practicable after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Congress a map and legal description of the Western Legacy District. The map and legal description shall have

the same force and effect as if included in this Act, except the Secretary may correct

clerical and typographical errors in such map and legal description. Copies of the

map and legal description shall be on file and available for public inspection in the

Office of the Director of the Bureau of Land Management, and in the appropriate

office of the Bureau of the Land Management in Utah.

(d) LEGACY COUNCIL.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall establish a Legacy Council to advise the

Secretary with respect to the Western Legacy District. The Legacy Council may

furnish advice and recommendations to the Secretary with respect to management, grants, projects, and technical assistance.

(2) MEMBERSHIP.—The Legacy Council shall consist of not more than 10 members appointed by the Secretary. Two members shall be appointed from among

the recommendations submitted by the Governor of Utah and 2 members shall

be appointed from among the recommendations submitted by the Emery County

Commissioners. The remaining members shall be persons recognized as experts

in conservation of the historical, cultural, natural, recreational, archeological,

environmental, biological, educational, and scenic resources or other disciplines

directly related to the purposes for which the Western Legacy District is established.

(3) RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER LAW.—The establishment and operation of the

Legacy Council established under this section shall conform to the requirement

of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) and the Federal Land

Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.).

(e) ASSISTANCE.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may make grants and provide technical assistance to accomplish the purposes of this section to any nonprofit or unit of

government with authority in the boundaries of the Western Legacy District.

(2) PERMITTED USES.—Grants and technical assistance made under this section may be used for planning, reports, studies, interpretive exhibits, historic

preservation projects, construction of cultural, recreational, educational, and interpretive facilities that are open to the public, and such other expenditures as

are consistent with this Act.

(3) PLANNING.—Up to $100,000 of amounts available to carry out this section

each fiscal year, up to a total amount not to exceed $200,000, may be provided

under this subsection only to a unit of government or a political subdivision of

the State of Utah for use for planning activities.

(4) MATCHING FUNDS.—Federal funding provided under this section may not

exceed 50 percent of the total cost of the activity carried out with such funding,

except that non-Federal matching funds are not required with respect to—

(A) planning activities carried out with assistance under paragraph (3);

and

(B) use of assistance under this section for facilities located on public

lands and that are owned by the Federal Government.

(5) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to be appropriated under this section not more than $1,000,000 annually for any fiscal

year, not to exceed a total of $10,000,000.

SEC. 102. MANAGEMENT AND USE OF THE SAN RAFAEL WESTERN LEGACY DISTRICT.

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary, through the Bureau of Land Management and

subject to all valid existing rights, shall administer the public lands within the

Western Legacy District pursuant to this Act and the applicable provisions of the

Federal Land Policy and Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.). The Secretary

shall allow such uses of the public land as the Secretary determines will further the

purposes for which the Western Legacy District was established.

(b) FISH AND WILDLIFE.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as affecting the

jurisdiction or responsibilities of the State of Utah with respect to fish and wildlife

within the Western Legacy District.

3

(c) PRIVATE LANDS.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as affecting private

property rights within the Western Legacy District.

(d) PUBLIC LANDS.—Nothing in this Act shall be construed as in any way diminishing the Secretary’s or the Bureau of Land Management’s authorities, rights, or

responsibilities for managing the public lands within the Western Legacy District.

TITLE II—SAN RAFAEL NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA

SEC. 201. DESIGNATION OF THE SAN RAFAEL NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA.

(a) PURPOSES.—In order to conserve, protect, and enhance for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations the unique and nationally important values of the Western Legacy District and the public lands described in subsection (b),

including historical, cultural, natural, recreational, scientific, archeological, paleontological, environmental, biological, wilderness, wildlife, educational, and scenic resources, there is hereby established the San Rafael National Conservation Area in

the State of Utah.

(b) AREAS INCLUDED.—The Conservation Area shall consist of approximately

947,000 acres of public lands in the County of Emery, Utah, as generally depicted

on the map entitled ‘‘San Rafael Western Legacy District and National Conservation

Area’’ and dated llll. Notwithstanding any depiction on such map, the boundary of the Conservation Area shall be set back 300 feet from the edge of the Interstate 70 right-of-way and 300 feet from the edge of the State Route 24 right-of-way.

(c) MAP AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION.—As soon as practicable after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Congress a map and legal description of the Conservation Area. The map and legal description shall have the

same force and effect as if included in this Act, except the Secretary may correct

clerical and typographical errors in such map and legal description. Copies of the

map and legal description shall be on file and available for public inspection in the

Office of the Director of the Bureau of Land Management and in the appropriate

office of the Bureau of Land Management in Utah.

SEC. 202. MANAGEMENT OF THE SAN RAFAEL NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA.

(a) MANAGEMENT.—The Secretary, acting through the Bureau of Land Management, shall manage the Conservation Area in a manner that conserves, protects,

and enhances its resources and values, including those resources and values specified in section 201(a), and pursuant to the Federal Land Policy and Management

Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), and other applicable provisions of law, including this Act.

(b) USES.—The Secretary shall allow only such uses of the Conservation Area as

the Secretary finds will further the purposes for which the Conservation Area is established.

(c) VEHICULAR USES.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except where needed for administrative purposes or to respond to an emergency, and subject to paragraph (2), use of motorized vehicles

in the Conservation Area shall be—

(A) prohibited at all times in areas where roads and trails did not exist

as of February 2, 2000;

(B) limited to roads and trails that—

(i) existed as of February 2, 2000; and

(ii) are designated for motorized vehicle use as part of the management plan prepared pursuant to subsection (f); and

(C) managed consistent with section 8340 of title 43, Code of Federal Regulations (relating to designating public lands as open, limited, or closed to

the use of off-road vehicles and establishing controls governing the use and

operation of off-road vehicles in such areas).

(2) LIMITATION ON APPLICATION.—(A) Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph

(1) do not limit the provision of reasonable access to private lands or State lands

within the Conservation Area.

(B) Any access to private lands or State lands pursuant to subparagraph (A)

of this paragraph shall be restricted to exclusive use by, respectively, the owner

of the private lands or the State.

(d) WITHDRAWALS.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to valid existing rights and except as provided in

paragraph (2), all Federal lands within the Conservation Area and all lands and

interests therein that are hereafter acquired by the United States are hereby

withdrawn from all forms of entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public

land laws and from location, entry, and patent under the mining laws, and from

operation of the mineral leasing and geothermal leasing laws and all amendVerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:07 Jun 07, 2000 Jkt 079006 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\HR647.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR647
4

ments thereto. Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to effect discretionary authority of the Secretary under other Federal laws to grant, issue, or

renew rights-of-way or other land use authorizations consistent with the other

provisions of this Act.

(2) COMMUNICATION FACILITIES.—The Secretary may authorize the installation of communications facilities within the Conservation Area, but only to the

extent that they are necessary for public safety purposes. Such facilities must

have a minimal impact on the resources of the Conservation Area and must be

consistent with the management plan established under subsection (f).

(e) HUNTING, TRAPPING, AND FISHING.—Hunting, trapping, and fishing shall be

permitted within the Conservation Area in accordance with applicable laws and regulations of the United States and the State of Utah, except that the Utah Division

of Wildlife Resources, or the Secretary after consultation with the Utah Division of

Wildlife Resources, may issue regulations designating zones where and establishing

periods when no hunting, trapping, or fishing shall be permitted for reasons of public safety, administration, or public use and enjoyment.

(f) MANAGEMENT PLAN.—Within 4 years after the date of enactment of this Act,

the Secretary shall develop a comprehensive plan for the long-range protection and

management of the Conservation Area. The plan shall describe the appropriate uses

and management of the Conservation Area consistent with the provisions of this

Act. The plan shall include, as an integral part, a comprehensive transportation

plan for the lands within the Conservation Area. In preparing the transportation

plan the Secretary shall conduct a complete review of all roads and trails within

the Conservation Area. The plan may incorporate appropriate decisions contained

in any current management or activity plan for the area and may use information

developed in previous studies of the lands within or adjacent to the Conservation

Area.

(g) STATE TRUST LANDS.—The State of Utah and the Secretary may agree to exchange Federal lands, Federal mineral interests, or payment of money for lands and

mineral interests of approximately equal value that are managed by the Utah

School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration and inheld within the boundaries of the Conservation Area.

(h) ACCESS.—The Bureau of Land Management, the State of Utah, and Emery

County may agree to resolve section 2477 of the Revised Statutes and other access

issues within the Conservation Area.

(i) WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT.—Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to diminish the

responsibility and authority of the State of Utah for management of fish and wildlife

within the Conservation Area.

(j) GRAZING.—Where the Secretary of the Interior currently permits grazing, such

grazing shall be allowed subject to all applicable laws, regulations, and executive

orders.

(k) NO BUFFER ZONES.—The Congress does not intend for the establishment of the

Conservation Area to lead to the creation of protective perimeters or buffer zones

around the Conservation Area. The fact that there may be activities or uses on

lands outside the Conservation Area that would not be permitted in the Conservation Area shall not preclude such activities or uses on such lands up to the boundary

of the Conservation Area consistent with other applicable laws.

(l) WATER RIGHTS.—Because the available water resources in the drainage basins

included in part within the exterior boundaries of the Conservation Area have already been appropriated—

(1) nothing in this Act, the management plan required by subsection (f), or

any action taken pursuant thereto, shall constitute either an express or implied

reservation of surface or ground water;

(2) nothing in this Act affects any valid existing water rights in existence before the date of enactment of this Act, including any water rights held by the

United States; and

(3) if the United States determines that additional water resources are needed

for the purposes of this Act, the United States shall work, with or through any

agency that is eligible to hold instream flow water rights, to acquire such rights

in accordance with Utah State water law.

(m) WILDERNESS ACTS.—Nothing in this Act alters the provisions of the Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C. 1131) or the Federal Land Policy and Management Act

of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) as they pertain to wilderness resources within the

Conservation Area. Recognizing that the designation of wilderness areas requires an

Act of Congress, the Bureau of Land Management, the State of Utah, Emery County, and affected stakeholders may work toward resolving various wilderness issues

within the Conservation Area.

5

SEC. 203. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this title

such sums as may be necessary.

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 3605 is to establish the San Rafael Western

Legacy District in the State of Utah, and for other purposes.

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

The establishment of the San Rafael Western Legacy District will

promote the development of historical, cultural, and recreational

resources related to the heritage of the San Rafael region and the

State of Utah. The area shall consist of approximately 2,842,800

acres of land in Emery County of Utah. An area within the Western Legacy District is to be designated as the San Rafael National

Conservation Area. This area, consisting of nearly one million

acres, is to be established to conserve, protect, and enhance the

unique and nationally important values of the area for future generations.

The San Rafael Swell region is an area clearly in need of a management scheme. Since I–70 bisects the area, visitation is high, but

not coordinated. Additionally, off-highway-vehicle use is increasing

in the area and must be managed.

In order to determine the appropriate management plan for the

area, a similar bill was introduced during the 105th Congress.

However, the previous bill specified land uses such as wilderness,

primitive, semi-primitive and the bill aroused opposition. As a result, the Secretary of Interior and the Emery County Commissioners, as well as all interested parties, began negotiations for a

more flexible approach. H.R. 3605 is the outcome of those discussions and provides for the establishment of a four-year planning

process to manage the National Conservation Area.

There are many diverse resources, ranging from archeological to

paleontological, in the San Rafael Swell region. However, there is

not a mechanism for bringing together information to conserve and

protect these resources. The Western Legacy District would provide

this mechanism by centralizing information and directing resources

toward those sites most in need of preservation.

The Committee recognizes that off-highway vehicle (OHV) use in

the area is a major concern. In fact, the Secretary of the Interior

closed all but four roads in Wilderness Study Areas within the area

encompassed by the bill (Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 55, March

21, 2000). The remaining roads can only remain open if undue resource degradation does not occur subject to section 8340 of title

43, Code of Federal Regulations. The process of negotiating the bill

has fostered a cooperative relationship, which allowed both the

County and OHV groups to support the closure of the roads. To

continue to address OHV use, Congressman Chris Cannon (R–UT)

offered an amendment in Committee that would prohibit OHVs

from all places where roads and trails did not exist before February

2, 2000, and allow them only on roads and trails specifically designated for OHV use in the management plan. The roads and trails

must also be managed consistent with section 8340 of title 43, Code

of Federal Regulations, which specifies that roads and trails may

only remain open if there is no undue resource degradation. The

6

amendment also requires that the Secretary of the Interior conduct

a complete review of all roads and trails within the Conservation

Area and include within the management plan a transportation

plan. The Committee feels that these measures will insure that

OHV use is consistent with the purposes of the National Conservation Area mandates, will insure proper regulation of OHV use, and

prevent resource degradation.

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 3605 was introduced on February 9, 2000, by Congressman

Chris Cannon (R–UT). The bill was referred to the Committee on

Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands. On March 2, 2000, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill, where the County Commissioners, the Utah State Historic Preservation Officer, Director of

the Utah Division of Parks and Recreation, and Director of the

Governor’s Rural Partnership Office testified in support of the bill.

Additionally, the Secretary of the Interior’s office testified in favor

of the bill. On March 23, 2000, the Subcommittee met to mark up

the bill. Mr. Cannon offered an amendment to make some technical

changes to the bill that added language that would ensure the Secretary of the Interior’s ability to grant rights-of-way and replace

the hunting, trapping, and fishing language with previously

agreed-upon language. It was adopted by voice vote. The bill was

then ordered favorably reported as amended to the Full Committee

by voice vote. On May 16, 2000, the Full Resources Committee met

to consider the bill. Mr. Cannon offered an amendment to insert

water rights language agreed to by Emery County and the Department of Interior. It was adopted by voice vote. Mr. Cannon, as described above, also offered an amendment to clarify off-highway-vehicle use in the National Conservation Area. It was adopted by

voice vote. Congressman Mark Udall (D–CO) offered an amendment to designate the land in the National Conservation Area as

Wilderness Study Areas. The amendment failed by a rollcall vote

of 10 to 21, as follows:

7

8

The bill as amended was then ordered favorably reported to the

House of Representatives by voice vote.

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title

The short title of the bill is the San Rafael Western Legacy District and National Conservation Act

Section 2. Definitions

(1) Conservation Area.—The term ‘‘Conservation Area’’ means

the San Rafael National Conservation Area established by section

201.

(2) Secretary.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of the

Interior.

(3) Western Legacy District.—The term ‘‘Western Legacy District’’ means the San Rafael Western Legacy District established by

section 101.

TITLE I—SAN RAFAEL WESTERN LEGACY DISTRICT

Section 101. Establishment of the San Rafael Western Legacy District

The San Rafael region possesses many important historical, cultural, and natural resources that are representative of the history

of the American West. Its history includes influence from Native

American culture, exploration, pioneering, and industrial development.

The Secretary of the Interior, through the Bureau of Land Management, shall administer the public lands within the San Rafael

Western Legacy District pursuant to the bill and the applicable

provisions of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act. The

Secretary of the Interior is also to establish a Legacy Council to advise the Secretary with respect to the Western Legacy District. The

Legacy Council’s purpose will be to furnish advice and recommendations to the Secretary with respect to management,

grants, projects, and assistance regarding the region. Up to 10

council members would be appointed by the Secretary, two of which

would be selected from Emery County and two from the Governor

of Utah. Other members of the Council would be persons recognized as experts in conservation of historical, cultural, and natural

resources or other disciplines directly related to purposes of the

Western Legacy District.

The Secretary may make grants and provide technical assistance

to accomplish the purposes of the Western Legacy District. The Act

provides for annual expenditures of no more than $1 million and

a maximum of $10 million. Federal matching funds may not exceed

50 percent of the total cost of the assistance or grant except in

cases where the funds are used for facilities located on public lands

owned by the federal government, or when used for planning.

Section 102. Management and use of the San Rafael Western Legacy

District

The Secretary must have discretion over the use of the public

land in the Legacy District for the purposes of furthering the reasons of its establishment. Nothing in this bill will affect the status

9

or administration of public or private lands, water rights, wilderness issues, grazing zones, or wildlife management in the Western

Legacy District.

TITLE II—SAN RAFAEL NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA

Section 201. Designation of the San Rafael National Conservation

Area

In order to conserve, protect, and enhance for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations the unique and nationally important values of the Western Legacy District and the public

lands described in subsection (b), including historical, cultural, natural, recreational, scientific, archeological, paleontological, environmental, biological, wilderness, wildlife, educational, and scenic resources, the San Rafael National Conservation Area, consisting of

nearly one million acres in the State of Utah, is designated.

Section 202. Management of the San Rafael National Conservation

Area

The Secretary, acting through the Bureau of Land Management,

would manage the Conservation Area. The Secretary shall allow

hunting, trapping and fishing in the Conservation Area in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. The Secretary, after

consulting with the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, may issue

regulations designating zones where and periods when no hunting,

trapping or fishing will be permitted for reasons of public safety,

administration, or public use and enjoyment.

This bill allows the State of Utah and the Department of the Interior to exchange federal lands, federal mineral interests, and/or

payment of money for land and mineral interests managed by the

Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration, of approximately equal value held within the boundaries of the Conservation Area. The Committee encourages the Secretary and the

State School Trust Lands Administration to enter into negotiations

promptly to trade the school trust lands out of the Conservation

Area.

The bill contains language to prevent the establishment of the

Conservation Area to lead to the creation of protective perimeters

or buffer zones. Uses of lands outside the Conservation Area shall

be consistent with applicable laws and not subject to regulation related to the Conservation Area.

Within four years following the date of enactment, the Secretary

will develop a comprehensive plan for the long-range protection

and management of the Conservation Area. The plan will outline

appropriate uses and management of the Conservation Area consistent with the provisions of this bill.

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.

10

FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

The functions of the proposed advisory committee authorized in

the bill are not currently being nor could they be performed by one

or more agencies, an advisory committee already in existence or by

enlarging the mandate of an existing advisory committee.

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Article I, section 8 and Article IV, section 3 of the Constitution

of the United States grant 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 in revenues or tax expenditures. According

to the Congressional Budget Office, enactment of H.R. 3605 could

result in a loss of offsetting receipts of less than $500,000 per year

from lost potential revenues from mining and geothermal leasing.

3. Government Reform Oversight Findings. Under clause 3(c)(4)

of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee has received no report of oversight findings and recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform on this

bill.

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, June 1, 2000.

Hon. DON YOUNG,

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. 3605, the San Rafael

Western Legacy District and National Conservation Act.

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.

11

H.R. 3605—San Rafael Western Legacy District and National Conservation Act

Summary: H.R. 3605 would establish the San Rafael Western

Legacy District in Emery County, Utah and would authorize the

appropriation of $1 million a year for a total of up to $10 million

for the Secretary of the Interior to provide grants and technical assistance in support of that district. The bill also would establish the

San Rafael National Conservation Area within the district and

would authorize the appropriation of sums necessary for the Secretary to manage that area.

CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 3605 would cost $15 million over the 2001–2005 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. Because the bill could affect offsetting receipts (a

form of direct spending), pay-as-you-go procedures would apply;

however, CBO estimates that any such effects would total less than

$500,000 a year. H.R. 3605 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform

Act (UMRA). State and local governments might incur some costs

as a result of the bill’s enactment, but these costs would be voluntary.

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of establishing and managing the legacy district and

conservation area is shown in the following table. The table does

not include additional costs that may be incurred after 2005 to implement the management plan that would be developed under H.R.

3605. We estimate that such implementation costs would not exceed $10 million. The costs of this legislation fall within budget

function 300 (natural resources and environment).

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Estimated Authorization Level ...................................................................... 3 3 3 3 3

Estimated Outlays ......................................................................................... 3 3 3 3 3

Basis of estimate: For the purpose of this estimate, CBO assumes

that H.R. 3605 will be enacted by the end of fiscal year 2000. We

also assume that the necessary funds will be appropriated starting

in fiscal year 2001 and that outlays would follow the historical pattern for similar activities.

Spending subject to appropriation

CBO estimates that establishing and managing the legacy district and conservation area as defined in this legislation would cost

about $3 million annually. That estimate includes $1 million authorized by the bill for each year to operate an advisory council and

to provide grants and technical assistance to support the legacy

district. In addition, based on information from the Bureau of Land

Management (BLM), CBO estimates that the agency would spend

about $2 million each year to establish and manage the conservation area. That amount includes the estimated costs of adding staff

and administrative services to the area, upgrading and maintaining existing infrastructure and facilities, and preparing the management plan required by the bill.

12

In addition, we estimate that implementing the management

plan after 2005 could cost up to $10 million, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts. According to BLM, implementing

that plan probably would require the construction of new visitor

and interpretive centers, campgrounds, and other facilities. Based

on information from the agency, we estimate that those activities

would require up to $10 million in additional funding, some of

which could be provided by nonfederal sources. Because the bill

would allow the agency to spend four years developing the plan, we

expect that any spending to implement it would not occur before

2005.

Direct spending (including offsetting receipts)

H.R. 3605 would withdraw land in the San Rafael National Conservation Area from mining, mineral leasing, and geothermal leasing, subject to valid existing rights. Enacting those provisions could

result in forgone offsetting receipts from the federal land over the

next five years if, under current law, the land would generate receipts from mineral and geothermal development. Based on information from BLM, however, we estimate that any such effects

would total less than $500,000 each year. We estimate that other

provisions in this bill would have no significant impact on direct

spending.

Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts. Because provisions in

H.R. 3605 that would withdraw certain lands from mining, mineral

leasing, and geothermal leasing could affect offsetting receipts, payas-you-go procedures would apply. CBO estimates, however, that

any such effects would not be significant.

Estimated impact on state, local, and tribal governments: H.R.

3605 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in

UMRA. The state of Utah and local governments within the state

might choose to participate in the planning for and management of

these areas, and incur some costs as a result. Such costs would be

voluntary, and could be partially offset by federal grants authorized

by the bill.

Estimated impact on the private sector: This bill contains no new

private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Megan Carroll; Impact on

State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Majorie Miller; and Impact

on the Private Sector: Natalie Tawil.

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.

(13)

DISSENTING VIEWS

We oppose H.R. 3605 in its present form. While the legislation

is an improvement over the seriously flawed proposal (H.R. 3625)

put forth in the 105th Congress, it still falls far short of providing

the resource protections the San Rafael region so richly deserves.

Our concerns with H.R. 3605 fall into five categories: (1) the

boundaries used in the legislation, (2) off-road (ORV) abuses, (3)

treatment of wilderness, (4) creation of a never before used ‘‘Western Legacy District’’ designation, and (5) water rights.

The boundaries of the National Conservation Area (NCA) designated in H.R. 3605 are grossly inadequate. The San Rafael Swell

is a great dome of uplifted sedimentary rock located in south-central Utah, measuring 50 miles long, 30 miles wide, and rising 150

feet above the surrounding desert. The area is ringed by highlands

and studded with mesas, buttes, deep gorges and narrow slot canyons. These resources define the area’s boundary, not the political

lines used in H.R. 3605. Proponents of the bill would have Members believe that the San Rafael Swell is located neatly within

Emery County, Utah, when in fact, it extends south into Wayne

County and west into Sevier County.

Significant portions of the proposed NCA boundary follow section

lines or roads. In what is the most glaring omission, the entire

southern boundary is a straight line that marks the political

boundary between Emery and Wayne countries. In many cases the

boundary excludes notable formations such as Factory Butte and

the Jones Bench. Many identified wilderness units are split in two

while others are cut off completely. The proposed boundaries also

fail to protect critical watersheds and Desert Bighorn Sheep habitat, ignore threatened and endangered species and sacrifice important resource lands to potential gypsum mining.

The language of the bill also fails to effectively deal with the

ORV problem the San Rafael Swell. ORV use in Utah has exploded

over the past 10–15 years and is not under control on public lands

in Utah. As a result, ORV abuse has become more common, with

ORVers pushing new trails into more remote areas each year. Citing significant damage to soil, vegetation, and other resources the

BLM was forced to do an emergency ORV closure in March for Wilderness Study Area (WSAs) in the San Rafael area. These WSAs

should have been off-limits already. With this is kind of damage occurring in the most pristine area, other spectacular lands in the

San Rafael are at risk. In fact ORV damage extends far beyond the

current WSAs.

The BLM has attempted since 1991 to come up with a plan to

regulate ORV use in the San Rafael but has failed to do so. That

failure has lead to severe damage in the Swell. The language in

H.R. 3605 would codify BLM regulations that have failed to protect

the San Rafael Swell. This is not a step forward. At best, it mainVerDate 11-MAY-2000 11:07 Jun 07, 2000 Jkt 079006 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6604 Sfmt 6604 E:\HR\OC\HR647.XXX pfrm07 PsN: HR647
14

tains the status quo which is a major problem. The bill language

also legitimizes routes that have been allowed to be developed during the ten-years BLM has failed to come up with a plan. If ORV

use is not managed to protect conservation area values, then the

designation of a National Conservation Area is meaningless.

H.R. 3605 ignores the question of wilderness, desperately trying

to pretend it doesn’t exist. However, what can’t be ignored is the

fact that the vast majority of the land in the San Rafael region is

of wilderness quality and is embodied in wilderness study areas,

identified as wilderness by the Department of the Interior, or included in a legislative wilderness proposal (H.R. 1732) sponsored

by more than 160 Members of the House. The Department of the

Interior testified that ‘‘The administration believes that wilderness

protections for a significant portion of this area is

warranted * * * ’’

Proponents’ claims to be ‘‘wilderness neutral’’ ring hollow when

their artificial boundaries divide or sever wilderness units and

their chief local proponent is quoted as saying ‘‘[H.R. 3605] is a

way of getting around wilderness, because wilderness has become

a problem, not a solution.’’ We strongly disagree with that assessment and oppose any attempt to subvert the consideration and designation of wilderness.

We are also concerned that H.R. 3605 includes an undefined and

unwarranted new kind of designation; a so-called ‘‘western legacy

district.’’ In H.R. 3605 this designation follows political lines to

completely encompass Emery County. No feasibility study was

done to assess this proposed $10 million program and there is

scant evidence of the historical and cultural resources that would

merit this special designation. We support historic preservation but

do not feel that the case has been made to single out one county

for special treatment, especially when there are historical resources

in many locations within the United States that are more significant and deserving.

Finally, water is the lifeblood of the desert ecosystem. Without

it, important desert resources would be lost. This is especially true

for the San Rafael in which there are only two year-round streams.

As it stands, the bill is inadequate to the task. Geared toward the

consumptive use of water, the State of Utah does not even recognize wilderness as a beneficial use of water. We do not advocate reappointment of existing flows but future uses must be weighed

against the resource values at stake here.

15

The San Rafael region is a vast geologic and scenic wonder that

deserves far better protection than that currently offered by H.R.

3605. Unless the bill is amended to address the concerns we have

enumerated, we must oppose H.R. 3605 and urge our colleagues to

do likewise.

GEORGE MILLER.

BRUCE VENTO.

CARLOS ROMERO-BARCELO ́.

PETER DEFAZIO.

FRANK PALLONE.

RUSH HOLT.

JOSEPH CROWLEY.

Æ