[Senate Report 106-340]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 679
106th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 106-340
======================================================================
YUMA CROSSING NATIONAL HERITAGE AREA ACT OF 1999
_______
July 12, 2000.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Murkowski, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1998]
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was
referred the bill (S. 1998) to establish the Yuma Crossing
National Heritage Area, having considered the same, reports
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the
bill, as amended, do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 6, line 26, after ``Heritage Area Board of
Directors'' insert ``which shall include representatives from a
broad cross-section of the individuals, agencies,
organizations, and governments that have been involved in the
planning and development of the Heritage Area to this point.
The management entity should also reflect those who may have an
interest in the purposes and objectives of the Heritage Area
now and in the future.''.
PURPOSE OF THE MEASURE
The purpose of S. 1998 is to establish the Yuma Crossing
National Heritage Area in Yuma, Arizona, and to designate the
management entity as the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area
Board of Directors.
BACKGROUND AND NEED
Thousands of years ago, prehistoric tribes, searching for a
way to cross the Colorado River, first came upon the Yuma
Crossing, a formation of two massive granite outcroppings on
the Colorado River. Years later, Spanish conquistadors planted
their nation's flag at the Yuma Crossing, almost 100 years
before the Pilgrim's landing at Plymouth Rock. As time passed,
thousands more would rely on the Yuma Crossing as it became a
focal point for the Nation's westward migration, bringing
travelers, trappers, soldiers, goldseekers and emigrants.
In recent years, various planning and development efforts
have brought renewed interest and activity to the City of Yuma.
In 1998 the Heritage Area Task Force was formed to develop a
heritage plan, detailing its vision, design, and construction.
The group developed a list of 150 cultural, historic, and
natural resources within the heritage area. Designation of Yuma
Crossing as a National Heritage Area would recognize the
national significance of its resources and aid in their
protection, preservation, and interpretation.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
S. 1998 was introduced by Senator McCain on November 19,
1999. Senator Kyl was added as a cosponsor on April 11, 2000.
Testimony from witnesses on this bill was included in the
record of the hearing held by the Subcommittee on National
Parks, Historic Preservation, and Recreation on May 25, 2000.
At its business meeting on June 7, 2000, the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 1998, as amended,
favorably reported.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND TABULATION OF VOTES
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open
business session on June 7, 2000, by a unanimous vote of a
quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 1998, if
amended as described herein.
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
During the consideration of S. 1998, the Committee adopted
an amendment to establish criteria for membership of the Yuma
Crossing National Heritage Area Board of Directors.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1 designates the bill's short title.
Section 2(a) contains congressional findings.
Subsection (b) describes the purposes of the bill. The
purposes are as follows: (1) to recognize the role of the Yuma
Crossing in the development of the United States; (2) to
promote, interpret, and develop the physical and recreational
resources of the communities surrounding Yuma Crossing; (3) to
foster a close working relationship between all levels of
government and the local communities in the Yuma region; (4) to
empower the community to conserve the heritage and natural
resources of the region while pursuing economic opportunities;
(5) to provide recreational opportunities; (6) to optimize the
use of riverfront property; and (7) to improve the ability of
the Yuma region to serve visitors and enhance the local economy
through the completion of major projects in the Heritage Area.
Section 3 defines the term ``Management Entity'' as the
Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area Board of Directors, and
provides definitions for other terms used in the bill.
Section 4 establishes the Yuma Crossing National Heritage
Area, describes the boundaries of the area, designates the Yuma
Crossing National Heritage Area Board of Directors as the
management entity, and establishes criteria for membership on
the board.
Section 5 directs the Secretary of the Interior to enter
into a compact with the management entity that includes a
discussion of the goals and objectives of the Heritage Area, an
explanation of the proposed approach to conservation and
interpretation, and an outline of the protection measures to
which the management entity commits. The management entity is
required to submit the proposed compact to the Secretary within
1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, and the
Secretary is to either approve or disapprove the compact within
90 days of its submission. If the compact is disapproved, the
Secretary must advise the management entity of the reasons why
and provide recommendations for its revision. Upon receipt of
the revised compact, the Secretary has 90 days to approve or
disapprove the compact.
Section 6(a) directs the management entity to develop a
management plan for the Heritage Area and describes 8 specific
elements that must be included in the plan. The management
entity is required to submit the plan to the Secretary within 3
years after the date of enactment of this Act, and the
Secretary must either approve or disapprove the plan within 90
days of its submission. If the planis disapproved, the
Secretary must advise the management entity of the reasons why and
provide recommendations for its revision. Upon receipt of the revised
plan, the Secretary has 90 days to approve or disapprove the plan. Once
the management plan has been approved, any substantial amendments to
the plan must be reviewed and approved by the Secretary.
Subsection (b) describes the duties of the management
entity. The duties are as follows: (1) implement the compact
and the management plan; (2) assist governmental and other
organizations in establishing and maintaining interpretive
exhibits, developing recreational resources, increasing public
awareness and appreciation for resources, and restoring
historic buildings in the Heritage Area; (3) encourage economic
viability consistent with the goals of the management plan; (4)
encourage the adoption by local governments of policies
consistent with the goals of the management plan; (5) consider
the interests of governmental business, and nonprofit groups
within the Heritage Area; (6) conduct quarterly public
meetings; and (7) ensure that all records relating to the
expenditure of Federal funds are made available for audit.
Subsection (c) authorizes the management entity to use
Federal funds to make grants, enter into cooperative
agreements, hire and compensate staff, and enter into contracts
for goods and services.
Subsection (d) prohibits the management entity from using
Federal funds received under this Act to acquire real property
or any interest in real property.
Subsection (e) clarifies that nothing in this Act prohibits
the management entity from using Federal funds from other
sources.
Subsection (f) clarifies that the management entity may use
Federal funds received under this Act to carry out activities
on property that is not owned by the Federal Government.
Section 7(a) authorizes the Secretary to provide technical
and financial assistance to the management entity.
Subsection (b) requires the Historic American Building
Survey/ Historic American Engineering Record to conduct any
study necessary to document the natural, cultural, historical,
recreational, and scenic resources of the Heritage Area.
Section 8 terminates the authority of the Secretary to make
grants or provide assistance under this Act on September 30,
2015.
Section 9 authorizes the appropriation of $10 million,
limited to $1 million in any one fiscal year, subject to a 50
percent match of non-Federal funds.
Cost and Budgetary Considerations
The following estimate of the cost of this measure, has
been provided by the Congressional Budget Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, June 20, 2000.
Hon. Frank H. Murkowski,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1998, the Yuma
Crossing National Heritage Area Act of 1999.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Deborah
Reis and Ali Aslam (for federal costs) and Natalie Tawil (for
the private-sector impact).
Sincerely,
Steven Lieberman
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
S. 1998--Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area Act of 1999
S. 1998 would establish the Yuma Crossing National Heritage
Area in the county and city of Yuma, Arizona. The bill would
direct the Secretary of the Interior to enter into an agreement
with the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area Board of
Directors, the designated management entity for the area, to
conserve and interpret area resources. The board would develop
a management plan that identifies activities and sources of
funding to protect and manage the heritage area. In addition,
the board would make grants to state and local agencies and
other entities to implement the plan. For these purposes, the
bill would authorize the appropriation of $10 million, not to
exceed $1 million annually.
Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO
estimates that implementing S. 1998 would cost $10 million over
the next 10 to 15 years. Such amounts would be used to cover a
portion of the costs of establishing, operating, and
interpreting the heritage area. The bill would not affect
direct spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go
procedures would not apply.
S. 1998 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). The state of
Arizona and local governments within the state might choose to
participate in the planning for and management of the national
heritage area and would incur some costs as a result. Such
costs would be voluntary. Participating governments would be
eligible to receive grants to cover a portion of the costs
associated with those activities. S. 1998 would impose no costs
on other state, local, or tribal governments.
The bill would impose private-sector mandates, but CBO
estimates that the total direct costs of those mandates would
fall well below the annual threshold established in UMRA ($109
million in 2000, adjusted annually for inflation) during the
first five years that the mandates are in effect.
S. 1998 would impose new private-sector mandates on the
Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area Board of Directors, which
the bill would designate as the management entity for the
heritage area. The bill would require the board to submit a
proposal for a compact with the federal government that
addresses objectives and interpretation of the heritage area.
The bill also would require the board to develop, and submit to
the Secretary of the Interior for approval, a management plan
for the heritage area. S. 1998 also would require the board to
conduct public meetings regarding the plan and to assist local
governments and other organizations in activities related to
the purposes of the heritage area. Based on information
provided by the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area Task
Force, CBO estimates that the total direct costs of mandates in
the bill would fall well below the annual threshold established
in UMRA in any of the first five years that the mandates would
be in effect. The bill would authorize appropriations to cover
up to 50 percent of the costs of developing and implementing
the management plan and would direct the Secretary to provide
technical assistance to the management entity upon request.
On June 20, 2000, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R.
2833, the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area Act of 2000, as
ordered reported by the House Committee on Resources on June 7,
2000. These bills are very similar and our cost estimates are
the same.
The CBO staff contacts are Deborah Reis and Ali Aslam (for
federal costs), Susan Sieg Tompkins (for the state and local
impact), and Natalie Tawil (for the private-sector impact).
This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
Regulatory Impact Evaluation
In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following
evaluation of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in
carrying out S. 1998. The bill is not a regulatory measure in
the sense of imposing Government-established standards or
significant economic responsibilities on private individuals
and businesses.
No personal information would be collected in administering
the program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal
privacy.
Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the
enactment of S. 1998, as ordered reported.
Executive Communications
On, May 23, 2000, the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources requested legislative reports from the Department of
the Interior and the Office of Management and Budget setting
forth Executive agency recommendations on S. 1998. These
reports had not been received at the time the report on S. 1998
was filed. When the reports become available, the Chairman will
request that they be printed in the Congressional Record for
the advice of the Senate. The testimony provided by the
National Park Service at the Subcommittee hearing follows:
Statement of Katherine Stevenson, Associate Director, Cultural
Resources Stewardship and Partnerships, National Park Service,
Department of the Interior
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for
the opportunity to appear before you to present the position of
the Department of the Interior on S. 1998, a bill to establish
the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area.
The Department supports S. 1998, with the amendment
outlined in our testimony. Last month we testified on similar
legislation, H.R. 2833, before the House Subcommittee on
National Parks and Public Lands. At that hearing we recommended
that the House bill be revised to incorporate some of the
concepts found in S. 1998. The recommendations included
defining the boundary and using a multi-agency approach to
complete a master plan based upon studies that meet National
Park Service criteria. We are pleased with the approach taken
by S. 1998 which will ensure that the resources of the National
Park Service as well as the proposed Heritage Area are
efficiently used to focus and protect the important resources
of this area.
S. 1998 would create the Yuma Crossing National Heritage
Area in Yuma, Arizona, based on work that has been conducted
for more than twenty years by the city and county of Yuma. This
work culminated in an executive summary in 1999 prepared by the
Heritage Task Force, a cross-section of citizens in the region.
The report and previous work conducted in Yuma has also
included organizations, agencies and potential partners in the
creation and management of a National Heritage Area.
This bill calls for the Secretary of the Interior to enter
into a compact with the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area
management entity for the purposes of further refining the
area's goals and objectives and outlining the protection
measures that will guide the management entity's efforts. S.
1998 calls for the development and approval of a management
plan for the Heritage Area. If the plan is not submitted within
three years, the Heritage Area becomes ineligible for Federal
funding. The bill also outlines the duties of the management
entity and prohibits it from using Federal funds to acquire
real property or interests in real property. S. 1998 authorizes
the management entity to spend Federal funds on non-federally
owned property. At the request of the management entity, the
Secretary would be authorized to provide technical and
financial assistance to develop and implement the management
plan. S. 1998 authorizes appropriations and limits Federal
funding to 50 percent of the total cost of any assistance or
grant and bars the Secretary from providing any assistance
under this Act after September 30, 2015.
The National Park Service has defined a National Heritage
Area as a place where natural, cultural, historic and
recreational resources combine to form a nationally distinctive
landscape arising from patterns of human activity. Heritage
conservation efforts are grounded in a community's pride in its
history and traditions, and its interest in seeing them
retained. Preserving the integrity of the cultural landscape
and local stories means that future generations of the
community will be able to understand and define who they are,
where they come from, and what ties them to their home.
Heritage areas are designed to protect large, regional
landscapes and resources that tell the story of its residents.
The National Park Service testified before the House
Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands last October 26
on H.R. 2532, a bill which would provide a process for the
establishment of national heritage areas. We outlined four
critical steps that needed to be completed prior to
designation. Those steps are:
(1) completion of a suitability/feasibility study;
(2) public involvement in the suitability/feasibility
study;
(3) demonstration of widespread public support among
heritage area residents for the proposed designation;
and
(4) commitment to the proposal from the appropriate
players which may include governments, industry, and
private, non-profit organizations, in addition to the
local citizenry.
We believe S. 1998 meets a large portion of the intent and
spirit of those steps.
Much of the work Yuma has done in studying and developing
popular support for this proposal has been accomplished with
minimal involvement of the National Park Service or a
traditional suitability and feasibility study. However, it has
built upon work, studies and reports which have identified
natural, historic, and cultural resources representing a
distinct, and yet familiar, story of the development and
settlement of the West. These efforts have also identified new
recreational and educational opportunities such as a river
walk, and wetlands restoration projects. The studies and
projects have incorporated the time and efforts of thousands of
citizens, the City and Chamber of Commerce for Yuma, local
Indian tribes, historical societies, state parks, community
development groups, and members of the Cocopah Tribe. In
essence, these groups have made great strides in accomplishing
the goals of a National Park Service suitability study in a
unique way.
More than 150 natural and cultural resources within the
proposed boundary for the Yuma Crossing National Heritage Area
have been identified. These resources tell the story of the
growth and development of an area from ancient times to the
present--all focused and based around the Colorado River and
the natural crossing of that river that drew ancient and modern
man alike to the place. Nearly 1,000 acres of wetlands have
been identified for protection and improvement for native
vegetation and wildlife, which will enhance opportunities for
birding and birding festivals. A natural history museum would
focus interest and educational opportunities on the role this
riparian environment plays in the middle of the Sonoran Desert.
River walks would link parks, the historic Arizona Territorial
State Prison, and downtown Yuma.
We recommend one amendment that would provide a broader
definition or description of the management entity to ensure
that it reflects the cross-section of agencies, organizations,
citizens and governments essential to any heritage area's
success. We have attached a copy of our proposed amendment to
this testimony.
We believe that the natural and cultural resources
protected in this proposal are well documented and retain
integrity. They will provide for recreational and educational
opportunities, and help tell the story of the development of
the West, a critical part of this nation's heritage and
identity.
I would be happy to respond to any questions that you may
have.
Proposed Amendment to S. 1998, To Establish the Yuma Crossing National
Heritage Area
On page 6, line 26, insert ``which shall include
representatives from a broad cross-section of the I
individuals, agencies, organizations, and governments that have
been involved in the planning and development of the Heritage
Area to this point. The management entity should also reflect
those who may have an interest in the purposes and objectives
of the Heritage Area now and in the future.'' after Heritage
Area Board of Directors.
changes in existing law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no
changes in existing law are made by the bill S. 1998, as
ordered reported.