```

[House Report 112-506]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

112th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     112-506

======================================================================

 
              MT. ANDREA LAWRENCE DESIGNATION ACT OF 2011

                                _______
                                

  May 30, 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

                         [To accompany S. 925]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred 
the bill (S. 925) to designate Mt. Andrea Lawrence, having 
considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment 
and recommend that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of S. 925 is to designate Mt. Andrea Lawrence.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    S. 925 would designate a currently unnamed mountain, 
located 0.6 miles northeast of Donahue Peak on the northern 
border of the Ansel Adams Wilderness and Yosemite National Park 
in California, as Mt. Andrea Lawrence. Andrea Lawrence was a 
successful Olympic skier, 16-year member of the Mono County 
Board of Supervisors and founder of the Andrea Lawrence 
Institute for Mountains and Rivers. She was a supporter of the 
work of the Inyo National Forest and Yosemite National Park. 
Ms. Lawrence passed away in 2009 at the age of 76. The 
management of the proposed Mt. Andrea Lawrence is shared 
between the Inyo National Forest and Yosemite National Park.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    S. 925 was introduced on May 9, 2011, by Senator Barbara 
Boxer (D-CA). On October 18, 2011, the bill passed the Senate 
by unanimous consent. The bill was then referred to the House 
Committee on Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the 
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands. On 
March 29, 2012, the Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 1818, 
sponsored by Howard ``Buck'' McKeon (R-CA), which is identical 
to S. 925. On April 25, 2012, the Full Natural Resources 
Committee met to consider S. 925. The Subcommittee on National 
Parks, Forests and Public Lands was discharged by unanimous 
consent. No amendments were offered to the bill and the bill 
was ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives 
by unanimous consent.

            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:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, April 30, 2012.
Hon. Doc Hastings,
Chairman, Committee on Natural Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
reviewed S. 925, the Mt. Andrea Lawrence Designation Act of 
2011, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Natural 
Resources on April 25, 2012.
    CBO estimates that enacting this legislation to name a peak 
in Mono County, California, would have no significant impact on 
the federal budget and would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. S. 
925 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.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Jeff LaFave.
            Sincerely,
                                              Douglas W. Elmendorf.

    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. CBO estimates that 
enacting this legislation would have no significant impact on 
the federal budget and would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
    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 designate Mt. Andrea Lawrence.

                           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.

                                  

```