PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.1728 / 105th Congress

National Park System New Area Studies Act

Referred to Subcommittee on Parks, Preservation and Recreation.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 22, 1997

National Park Service Administrative Amendment of 1997 -Title I: New Area Establishment - Amends Federal law to repeal provisions which require the Secretary of the Interior to report to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and to the President of the Senate on areas of national significance that have been studied for potential inclusion in the National Park System (NPS) and requiring, within such report, a listing of not less than 12 such areas. Directs the Secretary to submit to the Committee on Resources of the House and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate, along with the annual budget, a list of areas recommended for study for potential inclusion in the NPS. Requires the Secretary to give: (1) consideration to those areas that have the greatest potential to meet the established criteria of national significance, suitability, and feasibility; and (2) special consideration to themes, sites, and resources not already adequately represented in the NPS as identified in the NPS Plan to be developed under the National Park System Reform Act of 1995. Prohibits studies of potential areas for inclusion in the NPS from being initiated after the enactment of this Act, except as specifically authorized by an Act of Congress. Provides that nothing in this Act shall: (1) limit the authority of the National Park Service to conduct preliminary resource assessments, gather data on potential study areas, provide technical and planning assistance, prepare or process nominations for administrative designations, update previous studies, or complete reconnaissance surveys of individual areas requiring a total expenditure of less than $25,000; or (2) be construed to apply to the study of any river segment or any trail for potential addition to the national wild and scenic rivers system or the national trails system. Directs the Secretary to complete the study for each area for potential inclusion in the NPS within three complete fiscal years following the date of enactment of specific legislation providing for the study. Requires: (1) each study to consider specified factors, including similar resources already protected, costs, public support, and alternatives for protecting the area; (2) each study to be completed in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; and (3) the letter transmitting each completed study to the Congress to contain a recommendation regarding the Secretary's preferred management option for the area. Requires the Secretary to: (1) establish a single office to be assigned to prepare all new area studies and to implement other new area functions; and (2) submit to such Committees, along with the annual budget, a list of areas which have been previously studied which contain primarily historical resources, and a list of areas which have been previously studied which contain primarily natural resources, in numerical order of priority for addition to the NPS. (Sec. 102) Authorizes appropriations.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Hefley, Joel [R-CO-5] · R–CO

Committees

  • Energy and Natural Resources Committee
  • Natural Resources Committee
1 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to Subcommittee on Parks, Preservation and Recreation.

  2. Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

  3. Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

  4. On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.

  5. Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.

  6. DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.

  7. Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6912-6913)

  8. Mr. Jones moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.

  9. Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 345.

  10. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 105-612.

  11. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 105-612.

  12. Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.

  13. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

  14. Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.

  15. Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

  16. Subcommittee Hearings Held.

  17. Executive Comment Requested from Interior.

  18. Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands.

  19. Referred to the House Committee on Resources.

  20. Introduced in House

  21. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.1728 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.1728 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.1728 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.1728 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.

View full prompt & sources