[House Report 107-391]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
107th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 107-391
======================================================================
TO DIRECT THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO STUDY THE SUITABILITY AND
FEASIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING HIGHWAY 49 IN CALIFORNIA, KNOWN AS THE
``GOLDEN CHAIN HIGHWAY'', AS A NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR
_______
April 9, 2002.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hansen, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 3425]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 3425) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to study
the suitability and feasibility of establishing Highway 49 in
California, known as the ``Golden Chain Highway'', as a
National Heritage Corridor, 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. STUDY; REPORT.
(a) Study.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date that
funds are first made available for this section, the Secretary
of the Interior, in consultation with the affected local
governments, the State government, State and local historic
preservation offices, community organizations, and the Golden
Chain Council, shall complete a special resource study of the
national significance, suitability, and feasibility of
establishing Highway 49 in California, known as the ``Golden
Chain Highway'', as a National Heritage Corridor.
(2) Contents.--The study shall include an analysis of--
(A) the significance of Highway 49 in American
history;
(B) options for preservation and use of the highway;
(C) options for interpretation of significant
features associated with the highway; and
(D) private sector preservation alternatives.
(3) Boundaries of study area.--The area studied under this
section shall be comprised of Highway 49 in California
extending from the city of Oakhurst in Madera County to the
city of Vinton in Plumas County, and lands, structures, and
cultural resources within the immediate vicinity of the
highway.
(b) Report.--Not later than 30 days after completion of the study
required by subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit a report
describing the results of the study to the Committee on Resources of
the House of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources of the Senate.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purpose of H.R. 3425 is to direct the Secretary of the
Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of
establishing Highway 49 in California, known as the ``Golden
Chain Highway,'' as a National Heritage Corridor.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
The Golden Chain Highway played a significant role in the
history of California and in the settlement of the West
resulting from the California Gold Rush. Today, the California
State Mining and Mineral Museum, Sutter's Mill in Coloma State
Park, and numerous other historic buildings remain along
Highway 49 from the Gold Rush era. H.R. 3245 authorizes the
Secretary of the Interior to complete a special recourse study
to determine the national significance, suitability, and
feasibility of establishing Highway 49 from the city of
Oakhurst, California to the city of Vinton, California, as a
National Heritage Corridor. The study will consider only those
lands, structures and cultural resources within the immediate
vicinity of the highway.
COMMITTEE ACTION
H.R. 3425 was introduced on December 6, 2001, by
Congressman George Radanovich (R-CA). The bill was referred to
the Committee on Resources, and within the Committee to the
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation, and Public Lands.
On December 13, 2001, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the
bill. On March 7, 2002, the Subcommittee met to mark up the
bill. Mr. Radanovich offered an amendment to clarify that the
city of Vinton, California, is in Plumas County, not Sierra
County, California. It was adopted by voice vote. The bill was
then ordered favorably reported to the Full Committee. On March
20, 2002, the Full Resources Committee met to consider the
bill. No amendments were offered and the bill as amended was
ordered favorably reported by unanimous consent to the House of
Representatives.
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, March 28, 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. 3425, a bill to
direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability
and feasibility of establishing Highway 49 in California, known
as the ``Golden Chain Highway,'' as a National Heritage
Corridor.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact for this
estimate is Deborah Reis.
Sincerely,
Dan L. Crippen.
Enclosure.
H.R. 3425--A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the
suitability and feasibility of establishing Highway 49 in
California, known as the ``Golden Chain Highway,'' as a
National Heritage Corridor
H.R. 3425 would require the National Park Service (NPS) to
prepare a special resource study of Highway 49 in California.
The study would determine the suitability and feasibility of
establishing the highway as a National Heritage Corridor and
would explore options for preserving it and interpreting
significant features. The legislation would require the agency
to complete the study within one year of receiving funding and
to report to the Congress on its findings 30 days later.
Based on information provided by the NPS and assuming
appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO estimates that
completing the required study and report would cost the federal
government $200,000, mostly over the next fiscal year. H.R.
3425 would not affect direct spending or receipts; therefore,
pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply. H.R. 3425 contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on
state, local, or tribal governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Deborah Reis.
The estimate was 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.