PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 24, 1996
Yellowstone River Valley Heritage Area Act of 1996 - Designates the Yellowstone River Valley Heritage Area in Montana, North Dakota, and Wyoming. Conditions such designation on the Secretary of the Interior's approval of a compact (which shall relate to the objectives and management of the proposed Heritage Area) and a management plan (which shall present comprehensive recommendations for the conservation, funding, management, and development of such Area). Authorizes the management entity named in the approved compact for the Area to receive Federal funds in support of cooperative partnerships to prepare and implement the management plan regarding the Area. Conditions eligibility for Federal funds on submission of such plan and limits the duration of eligibility to ten years after the Area is designated (with a five-year extension authorized). Directs the management entity to publish procedures to ensure that the rights of owners of private property are protected, including a process to provide information to such owners with respect to obtaining just compensation due as a result of taking of private property under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) advise State and local governments, nonprofit organizations, and other appropriate entities as to suitable methods of recognizing and preserving thematically and geographically linked natural, historic, and cultural resources and recreational opportunities; and (2) consider the Area for nomination to the World Heritage List if it meets the nomination qualifications. Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) Federal matching grants and technical assistance to governmental units and private nonprofit organizations regarding compacts and management plans; (2) specified criteria for such assistance; (3) spending Federal funds on non-federally owned property; (4) reporting requirements; (5) duties of Federal entities conducting Area activities; and (6) the lack of effect of this Act on other land use regulation. Authorizes appropriations. Specifies funding limitations.
People & committees
Rep. Williams, Pat [D-MT-At Large] · D–MT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Lands.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E629)
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. 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.3317 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.3317 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.3317 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.3317 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.