Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

108th Congress                                            Rept. 108-508
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                      Part 1

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



 
                  GATEWAY COMMUNITIES COOPERATION ACT

                                _______
                                

  May 20, 2004.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 1014]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 1014) 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''.

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

  (a)  Findings.--Congress finds the following:
          (1) Many communities that abut or are 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) Some of 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 service, medical support, 
        logistical support, living quarters, and drinking water and 
        sanitary systems for 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) Many 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, auto repairs, emergency services, and visitor 
        information.
          (5) Development in some gateway communities may impact the 
        management and protection of these Federal lands.
          (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 management agencies and 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.--The purpose of this section is 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, including the 
        availability of historical and cultural resources; and
          (3) result in better local land use planning in gateway 
        communities and decisions by the relevant Secretary.
  (c) Definitions.--For the purpose of this section, the following 
definitions apply:
          (1) Gateway community.--The term ``gateway community'' means 
        a county, city, town, village, or other subdivision of a State, 
        a federally recognized Indian tribe, or Alaska Native village, 
        that--
                  (A) is incorporated or recognized in a county or 
                regional land use plan or within tribal jurisdictional 
                boundaries; and
                  (B) the relevant Secretary (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 the relevant 
                Secretary.
          (2) Relevant secretary--The term ``relevant Secretary'' means 
        the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture, 
        as appropriate.
  (d)  Participation in Federal Planning and Land Use.--
          (1)  Participation in planning.--At the earliest possible 
        time, the relevant Secretary shall solicit the involvement of 
        elected and appointed officials of governments of 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 lands under the jurisdiction 
        of these Federal agencies that are likely to have a significant 
        impact on these gateway communities.
          (2) Information provided.--To facilitate such involvement, 
        the relevant Secretary shall provide the appropriate officials, 
        at the earliest possible time but not later than the scoping 
        process, with the following:
                  (A) A summary, in nontechnical language, of the 
                assumptions, purposes, goals, and objectives of the a 
                plan, decision, project, or policy.
                  (B) A description of any anticipated significant 
                impact of the plan, decision, project, or policy on 
                gateway communities.
                  (C) Information regarding the technical assistance 
                and training available to the gateway community.
          (3)  Training sessions.--At the request of a gateway 
        community, the relevant Secretary shall offer training sessions 
        for elected and appointed officials of gateway communities at 
        which such officials can obtain a better understanding of--
                  (A) the 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 a gateway 
        community, the relevant Secretary shall make available 
        personnel, on a temporary basis, to assist gateway communities 
        in development of mutually compatible land use or management 
        plans.
          (5)  Coordination of land use.--The relevant Secretary may 
        enter into cooperative agreements with gateway communities to 
        coordinate the management of--
                  (A) the land use inventory, planning, and management 
                activities for the Federal lands administered by the 
                relevant Secretary; 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.
          (6)  Interagency cooperation and coordination.--To the extent 
        practicable, when the plans and activities of 2 or more Federal 
        agencies are anticipated to have a significant impact on a 
        gateway community, the Federal agencies involved shall 
        consolidate and coordinate their plans and planning processes 
        to facilitate the participation of affected gateway communities 
        in the planning processes.
          (7)  Treatment as cooperating agencies.--To the earliest 
        extent practicable, but not later than the scoping process, 
        when a proposed action is determined to require an 
        environmental impact statement, the relevant Secretary shall 
        allow any affected gateway communities the opportunity to be 
        recognized as cooperating agencies under the National 
        Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
  (e)  Grants to Small Gateway Communities.--
          (1) In general.--The relevant Secretary may make grants to 
        any gateway community with a population of 10,000 or less to 
        carry out the purposes of this section.
          (2)  Authorization of appropriations for grantmaking.--There 
        are hereby authorized to be appropriated $10,000,000 for each 
        fiscal year for grants under this subsection.
  (f)  Authorization of Appropriations.--There are hereby authorized to 
be appropriated to carry out this Act (other than for grants under 
subsection (e)), $10,000,000 for each fiscal year.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 1014 is to require federal land 
managers to support, communicate, coordinate and cooperate with 
designated gateway communities to improve their ability to 
participate in federal land management planning conducted by 
the Forest Service and agencies of the Department of the 
Interior.

                  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 system are impacted by 
decisions made by managers of these public lands. In many 
cases, these ``gateway communities'' also play an integral role 
in accomplishing the mission of these federal land managers by 
providing necessary services, such as schools, roads, search 
and rescue, emergency and medical support, drinking water and 
sanitary systems.
    H.R. 1014 defines a ``gateway community'' as a county, 
city, town, village or other subdivision of a State (or a 
federally-recognized American Indian tribe or Alaska Native 
Village) that is: (1) incorporated or recognized in a county or 
regional land use plan or within tribal jurisdictional 
boundaries; and (2) is significantly affected economically, 
socially, or environmentally by the planning and management 
decisions regarding federal lands administered by the 
Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture (as determined by a 
federal land manager or the head of a State tourism office).
    H.R. 1014 seeks to improve the relationship among federal 
land managers, elected officials, and residents of gateway 
communities; enhance facilities and services in gateway 
communities available to visitors to federal lands, when 
compatible with the management of those lands; and improve the 
coordination of local land use planning and decisions by 
federal land managers.
    To ensure the intent of H.R. 1014 is fully realized, the 
bill requires that the relevant Secretary solicit the 
involvement of the relevant gateway communities early in the 
process, when the criteria established in the bill are met. The 
bill also requires the relevant Secretary to provide early 
written notice to potentially effected gateway communities, 
alerting them to the additional benefits that will be provided 
to them under H.R. 1014, at their request.
    Another essential component of the bill is a provision 
allowing affected gateway communities the opportunity to be 
recognized as cooperating agencies under the National 
Environmental Policy Act. Absent H.R. 1014, the elected 
representatives of a gateway community would not have the 
opportunity to seek this important status. H.R. 1014 does not, 
however, require the lead agency to grant cooperating agency 
status to gateway communities.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    Congressman George Radanovich (R-CA) introduced H.R. 1014 
on February 27, 2003.\1\ The bill was referred primarily 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. The Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and 
Public Lands met to mark up the bill on October 21, 2003. 
Chairman Radanovich offered an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute to the bill. Ranking Member Christensen (D-VI) 
offered a substitute amendment to the Radanovich amendment. The 
Christensen substitute amendment was not adopted by voice vote. 
No further amendments were offered and the Radanovich amendment 
in the nature of a substitute was adopted by voice vote. The 
bill was then forwarded, as amended, to the Resources Committee 
by voice vote. On May 5, 2004, the Committee on Resources met 
to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on Forests and Forest 
Health and the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife 
and Oceans were discharged from further consideration of the 
bill by unanimous consent. No additional amendments were 
offered and the bill, as amended, was ordered favorably 
reported to the House of Representatives by unanimous consent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ During the 107th Congress, the Subcommittee on National Parks, 
Recreation and Public Lands held a hearing and the Resources Committee 
favorably reported similar legislation (H.R. 4622).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            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. As required by 
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or 
objective of this bill 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.
    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, May 13, 2004.
Hon. Richard W. Pombo,
 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. 1014, the Gateway 
Communities Cooperation Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Megan 
Carroll.
            Sincerely,
                                      Elizabeth M. Robinson
                               (For Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Director).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 1014--Gateway Communities Cooperation Act

    Summary: H.R. 1014 would authorize the appropriation of $20 
million a year for programs to promote the involvement of local 
communities in federal land-use planning. CBO estimates that 
implementing the bill would cost $5 million in 2005 and $83 
million over the 2005-2009 period, assuming appropriation of 
the authorized amounts. The bill would not affect direct 
spending or revenues.
    H.R. 1014 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. 1014 will be enacted near the 
start of fiscal year 2005 and that the authorized amounts will 
be provided near the start of each fiscal year. The estimated 
budgetary impact of H.R. 1014 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
                                                                    --------------------------------------------
                                                                       2005     2006     2007     2008     2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Authorization level................................................       20       20       20       20       20
Estimated outlays..................................................        5       14       20       22       22
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Basis of estimate: H.R. 1014 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. The bill would authorize 
the appropriation of $10 million a year for those agencies to 
provide training and technical assistance to local officials to 
enable them to participate more effectively in the planning 
process for federal land-use. In addition, the bill would 
authorize the appropriation of $10 million a year for grants to 
particularly small gateway communities to support their 
involvement in that process.
    Based on information from the Forest Service and the 
Department of the Interior regarding historical spending 
patterns for similar programs, CBO estimates that providing 
training and technical assistance to gateway communities would 
cost $3 million in 2005 and $45 million over the 2005-2009 
period, assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts. We 
also estimate that grants to small communities would cost $2 
million in 2005 and $38 million (from the authorized amounts) 
over the next five years.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 1014 
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: Majorie Miller. Impact 
on the Private Sector: Paige Piper/Bach.
    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

                          House of Representatives,
                                    Committee on Resources,
                                      Washington, DC, May 19, 2004.
Hon. Bob Goodlatte,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives, Longworth 
        House Office Building, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: I request your assistance in expediting 
the consideration of four bills, all of which were referred 
primarily to the Committee on Resources and additionally to the 
Committee on Agriculture: H.R. 1014, the Gateway Communities 
Cooperation Act; H.R. 2966, the Right-to-Ride Livestock on 
Federal Lands Act of 2003; H.R. 3247, the TRAIL Act; and H.R. 
3846, the Tribal Forest Protection Act of 2004.
    The Committee on Resources ordered all the bills favorably 
reported with amendments on May 5, 2004, either by vote voice 
or unanimous consent. I have forwarded copies of the reported 
texts to your staff.
    Because of the limited number of days remaining in the 
108th Congress and the importance of these bills to the authors 
and our Nation, I ask you not to insist on your additional 
referrals of the bills and allow the Committee on Agriculture 
to be discharged so that they may be voted on when the House of 
Representatives returns from its Memorial Day district work 
period. Of course, by agreeing to this request, you are not 
waiving jurisdiction over the bills, nor is this action to be 
construed as a precedent for other, similar legislation. In 
addition, I would support a request from the Committee on 
Agriculture to be represented on any conference on H.R. 1014, 
H.R. 2966, H.R. 3247 or H.R. 3846 or companion Senate bills, 
should a conference become necessary. Finally, I would include 
this letter and any response you might have in the Committee on 
Resources' bill reports for the four bills.
    Thank you for consideration of my request. I appreciate our 
continued excellent working relationship on forest issues and 
look forward to working with you again.
            Sincerely,
                                          Richard W. Pombo,
                                                          Chairman.
                                ------                                

                          House of Representatives,
                                  Committee on Agriculture,
                                      Washington, DC, May 20, 2004.
Hon. Richard Pombo,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives, Longworth 
        House Office Building, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your May 19, 2004 
correspondence regarding H.R. 1014, the Gateway Communities 
Cooperation Act; H.R. 3247, the TRAIL Act; and H.R. 3846, the 
Tribal Forest Protection Act of 2004. As you are aware, the 
Committee on Agriculture was granted an additional referral of 
all these pieces of legislation.
    Knowing of your interest in expediting this legislation, I 
will discharge H.R. 1014, H.R. 3247 and H.R. 3846 from further 
consideration by the Committee on Agriculture. I do so with the 
understanding that by discharging these bills the Committee on 
Agriculture does not waive any future jurisdictional claim over 
these or similar measures. In addition, in the event a 
conference with the Senate is requested on these matters, the 
Committee on Agriculture reserves the right to seek appointment 
of conferees, if it should become necessary.
    Thank you very much for your courtesy in this matter and I 
look forward to continued cooperation between our Committees as 
we deal with these issues in the future.
            Sincerely,
                                             Bob Goodlatte,
                                                          Chairman.