PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Moore, Riley M. [R-WV-2] · R–WV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Oct 5, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10581 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10581 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10581 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10581 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-24 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Shenandoah VALOR Act would expand the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District to include additional counties in Virginia and West Virginia. It would require a distinct management framework, exempt the district from certain National Heritage Area provisions, and authorize funding for management, historic properties, grants, and land purchases from willing sellers. The changes concern the district’s management organization and the areas within its expanded boundaries.
This Act may be cited as the Shenandoah Valley Access, Legacy, and Outdoor Recreation Act or Shenandoah VALOR Act.
(ii) Rockbridge County, Virginia; (iii) Berkeley, Jefferson, and Morgan Counties, West Virginia;
The District shall be managed and administered by the management entity— (A) as a distinct National Historic District partnership model;
the District shall not be subject to the administrative provisions or funding allocation formulas applicable to components of the National Heritage Area System
(d) Authorization of appropriations There are authorized to be appropriated— (1) for fiscal year 2027 and each fiscal year thereafter, $1,250,000 to the management entity, of which— (A) not more than $625,000 for each fiscal year shall be used for operations of the management entity; and (B) not more than $625,000 for each fiscal year shall be used for the operation and maintenance of the battlefield parks, visitor facilities, and preserved historic properties in the District;
(2) for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2033, $2,500,000 for— (A) grants and technical assistance under subsection (g) of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District and Commission Act of 1996 (54 U.S.C. 320101 note; Public Law 104–333); and (B) the acquisition from willing sellers of land and interests in land for the District.
Section 2 would add Rockbridge County, Virginia, and Berkeley, Jefferson, and Morgan Counties, West Virginia, to the district. It would also change the establishment language from Virginia alone to Virginia and West Virginia.
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking Commonwealth of Virginia and inserting States of Virginia and West Virginia;
(ii) Rockbridge County, Virginia; (iii) Berkeley, Jefferson, and Morgan Counties, West Virginia;
The district’s management organization would administer it as a distinct National Historic District partnership, following the purposes in the 1996 law and the plan. The plan would have to be updated as needed for interpretation, partnerships, resources, and other needs in the added areas.
The District shall be managed and administered by the management entity— (A) as a distinct National Historic District partnership model; and (B) subject to paragraph (2), in accordance with— (i) the purposes described in subsection (c) of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District and Commission Act of 1996 (54 U.S.C. 320101 note; Public Law 104–333); and (ii) the plan, subject to the condition that the plan shall be updated as necessary to address interpretive measures, partnerships, and other resources and needs in the areas added to the District by the amendments made by subsection (b).
References to the Commonwealth of Virginia in the district’s 1996 law or plan would be read as referring to both Virginia and West Virginia.
Any reference contained in the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District and Commission Act of 1996 (54 U.S.C. 320101 note; Public Law 104–333) or the plan to the Commonwealth of Virginia shall be considered to be a reference to the States of Virginia and West Virginia.
The district would be exempt from the administrative provisions and funding allocation formulas applicable to National Heritage Area System components under section 6001 of the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act. The exemption would apply notwithstanding other provisions of law. The referenced provisions are not supplied, so their specific requirements and the exemption’s detailed effects cannot be established here.
(3) Applicability of other law Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the District shall not be subject to the administrative provisions or funding allocation formulas applicable to components of the National Heritage Area System under section 6001 of the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act (54 U.S.C. 320101 note; Public Law 116–9).
Beginning in fiscal year 2027, the bill would require management and administration funding for the district and its management organization to remain at least at the fiscal year 2026 level. It would also preserve their eligibility for technical assistance and grants otherwise available to National Heritage Areas. These provisions have no stated end year. The supplied sources do not give the fiscal year 2026 amount or establish how this funding requirement would interact with future appropriations.
(4) Eligibility for funding Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for fiscal year 2027 and each fiscal year thereafter, the District and the management entity shall continue— (A) to receive funding for purposes of management and administration of the District in an amount equal to not less than the amount provided for those purposes in fiscal year 2026; and (B) to be eligible for any technical assistance or grants otherwise available to National Heritage Areas.
The bill would authorize appropriations of $1.25 million annually for the management organization starting in fiscal year 2027, with no stated end year. Of that amount, it would cap annual use at $625,000 for the organization’s operations and $625,000 for operating and maintaining battlefield parks, visitor facilities, and preserved historic properties. This provision authorizes appropriations; it does not itself appropriate those funds.
(d) Authorization of appropriations There are authorized to be appropriated— (1) for fiscal year 2027 and each fiscal year thereafter, $1,250,000 to the management entity, of which— (A) not more than $625,000 for each fiscal year shall be used for operations of the management entity; and (B) not more than $625,000 for each fiscal year shall be used for the operation and maintenance of the battlefield parks, visitor facilities, and preserved historic properties in the District;
The bill would separately authorize appropriations of $2.5 million each fiscal year from 2027 through 2033 for grants and technical assistance under subsection (g) of the district’s 1996 law and for buying land or interests in land from willing sellers for the district. This authorization would end with fiscal year 2033 and would not itself appropriate money. The referenced subsection is absent, so its grant and assistance conditions cannot be described from the supplied evidence.
(d) Authorization of appropriations There are authorized to be appropriated—
(2) for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2033, $2,500,000 for— (A) grants and technical assistance under subsection (g) of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District and Commission Act of 1996 (54 U.S.C. 320101 note; Public Law 104–333); and (B) the acquisition from willing sellers of land and interests in land for the District.
Within two years after enactment, the Secretary of the Interior would have to report to Congress with recommendations for replicating the district’s partnership model at other National Park System locations.
(e) Report Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall submit to Congress a report that includes recommendations of the Secretary for methods to replicate the partnership model used in the District at other locations in the National Park System.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated October 5, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Natural Resources on September 24, 2026. It does not establish subsequent legislative action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-05T11:49:56Z. 2026-09-24: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. 2026-09-24: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-24. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified after reviewing the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials, or any amendment’s attachment history.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
Evidence is limited
Authorization language alone does not establish formal earmark status. The supplied evidence lacks the disclosures and accompanying allocation materials needed to resolve that classification.
The proposed annual $1.25 million authorization designates the district’s management entity as recipient. A separate $2.5 million annual authorization supports district-related grants, assistance, and willing-seller land purchases through fiscal year 2033. Their recipient and geographic specificity warrant scrutiny, but these authorizations alone do not establish earmarks or whether allocations would occur outside competitive or formula processes.
(d) Authorization of appropriations There are authorized to be appropriated— (1) for fiscal year 2027 and each fiscal year thereafter, $1,250,000 to the management entity
(2) for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2033, $2,500,000 for— (A) grants and technical assistance under subsection (g) of the Shenandoah Valley Battlefields National Historic District and Commission Act of 1996 (54 U.S.C. 320101 note; Public Law 104–333); and (B) the acquisition from willing sellers of land and interests in land for the District.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The findings identify materially narrow exceptions and protections related to the bill’s main policy. This classification does not establish improper motive or waste.
The district would receive a special exemption from National Heritage Area System administrative provisions and funding allocation formulas under the specified law. This is a district-specific exception within the bill’s management framework; the absent referenced provisions prevent assessment of its detailed effects.
(3) Applicability of other law Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the District shall not be subject to the administrative provisions or funding allocation formulas applicable to components of the National Heritage Area System under section 6001 of the John D. Dingell, Jr. Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act (54 U.S.C. 320101 note; Public Law 116–9).
The district and its management organization would receive a specific funding protection supporting district administration: beginning in fiscal year 2027, management and administration funding would have to remain at least at the fiscal year 2026 amount. The text states that this requirement applies notwithstanding other law and gives it no end year. The baseline amount and its interaction with future appropriations are not established by the supplied evidence.
(4) Eligibility for funding Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for fiscal year 2027 and each fiscal year thereafter, the District and the management entity shall continue— (A) to receive funding for purposes of management and administration of the District in an amount equal to not less than the amount provided for those purposes in fiscal year 2026;
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 5, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI