rates from the date of the final order or the date of the final judgment, as the case may be). The district court shall have jurisdiction to hear and decide any such action. In such action, the validity, amount, and appropriateness of such penalty shall not be subject to review. Any person who fails to pay on a timely basis the amount of an assessment of a civil penalty as described in the first sentence of this paragraph shall be required to pay, in addition to such amount and interest, attorneys fees and costs for collection proceedings.

—is the standard enforcement provision found in other laws including the Clean Water Act

On p. 13, line 8, strike “may be subject to forfeiture...involved in the violation." insert

"shall be subject to civil forfeiture, or upon conviction, to criminal forfeiture. All provisions of law relating to the seizure, forfeiture, and condemnation of property for a violation of this Act, the disposition of such property or the proceeds from the sale thereof, and remission or mitigation of such forfeiture, as well as the procedural provisions of Chapter 46 to Title 18, United States Code, shall apply to the seizures and forfeitures incurred or alleged to have been incurred under the provisions of this Act.".

-makes a distinction between civil forfeiture and ensures that criminal forfeiture only could occur upon conviction -makes clear that the protections of the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA), an act to provide a more just and uniform procedure for Federal civil forfeitures, would apply

On p. 13, after line 17, insert new (c):

"(c) TRANSFER OF SEIZED RESOURCES. The Secretary is authorized to transfer ownership or administration of seized paleontological resources to Federal or non-Federal educational institutions to be used for scientific or educational purposes."

-allows the establishment of partnerships with schools and other entities to transfer seized resources (for example, some resources that are recovered with no record of their context may have lost value to a museum, but may still have educational value)

On p. 13, after line 18, strike entire section and insert:

"(a) Information concerning the nature or specific location of a paleontological resource the collection of which requires a permit under this Act or under any other provision of Federal law shall be withheld from the public

(1) in response to a request under subchapter II of chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code; or

(2) notwithstanding any other provision of law that would authorize release.

(b) The information described in subsection (a) shall be released if the responsible Secretary determines that disclosure would

(1) further the purposes of the Act;

(2) not create a risk of harm to or theft or destruction of the resource or the site containing the resource; and

(3) be in accordance with other applicable laws."

On p. 15, line 3, after "time" insert "under".

Senator THOMAS. Thank you.
Ms. Estill.

STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH ESTILL, DEPUTY CHIEF, PROGRAMS, LEGISLATION AND COMMUNICATION, FOREST SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Ms. ESTILL. Well, thank you for the opportunity to be here today. I will provide the Department of Agriculture's comments on S. 546, the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act. During the 107th Congress, the Department supported the purpose of a very similar bill and provided some recommended changes to committee staff. I am pleased to see that some of the Department's concerns were addressed in S. 546.

The Department supports the purpose of this bill, but again, we would like to work with the subcommittee on a few additional aspects. Unified guidelines for paleontological resource management are greatly needed on National Forest System lands. Forest users are demanding opportunities for recreation, education, interpretation, and scientific study of fossils. As these legitimate demands increase, so does the amount of illegal activity like theft and vandalism.

The Forest Service currently manages paleontological resources under a patchwork of laws that don't specifically address their unique characteristics, nor do they provide adequate management and protection of the resource. In 1996, a case involving fossil theft on the National Forest System lands in California, which was prosecuted under civil law by the Department of Justice, pointed out the need for more specific statutes and regulations related to the theft of Federal fossils. It is really a big problem. Between 1991 and 1996, a third of all the fossil sites inventoried on the Ogalala National Grasslands in Nebraska were found to have been vandalized, and that is probably not an unusual statistic. The stories that those fossils could have told will now never be heard. The values lost to science and the public is poorer for it.

The Forest Service needs the additional authority that S. 546 provides to manage and protect paleontological resources. If enacted, the bill would establish noncommercial collection provisions, including permitting requirements for scientific and educational purposes using uniform and consistent criteria. An important aspect of this bill from the Forest Service's perspective is its formal recognition of casual collecting of invertebrate and plant fossils for recreational noncommercial use. It allows noncommercial recreational collecting without a permit, unless there is some overriding land use designation.

S. 546 provides uniform criminal and civil penalties for theft and damage to paleontological resources. There is some language in section 11 that specifies a maximum reward amount, and we do believe that it is better left unstated and allow the amount to be set based on the significance of each case and the need for such assist

ance.

Mr. Chairman, paleontological resources, especially vertebrate fossils, are heritage resources. They are evidence of the past history of life on earth. They provide opportunities for the public to learn more about ancient earth's ecosystems and the development of life from research and study of these resources. The Paleontological Resources Preservation Act would help secure the authority for the Forest Service to manage and protect all paleontological resources on the National Forest System.

This concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer any questions.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Estill follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH ESTILL, DEPUTY CHIEF, PROGRAMS, LEGISLATION AND COMMUNICATION, FOREST SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to be here today. I am Elizabeth Estill, Deputy Chief for Programs, Legislation and Communications, USDA Forest Service. I will provide the Department's comments on S. 546, the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act.

During the 107th Congress, the Department supported the purpose of S. 2727; a similar bill also entitled the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act, and provided some recommended changes to the committee staff. I am pleased to see some of the Department's concerns addressed in S.546. The Department supports the purpose of the bill, but we would like to work with the Committee to address some of our other recommendations.

Unified guidelines for paleontological resources management and special protection for vertebrate paleontological resources are greatly needed on National Forest System lands. Forest users, amateurs and scientists alike, are demanding opportunities for recreation, education, interpretation, and the scientific study of fossils. As these legitimate demands increase so does the amount of illegal activity such as theft and vandalism. Therefore, clearly defined, consistent laws and penalties to deter theft and vandalism of fossils from federal lands are also needed.

The Forest Service currently manages paleontological resources under a patchwork of laws that do not specifically address their unique characteristics nor provide adequate management and protection of the resource. These laws include the Organic Administration Act of 1897, the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, and the Federal Cave Resources Protection Act of 1988. The later statutes only protect paleontological resources when they are associated with archeological resources, or when they occur in caves, respectively.

A consistent statutory framework will enhance overall management of paleontological resources on National Forest System lands. Between 1991 and 1996, onethird of all fossil sites inventoried in the Oglala National Grassland in Nebraska were found to have been vandalized, and as a result, valuable data was lost to science and to the public. In 1996, a case involving fossil theft on National Forest System lands in California, which was prosecuted under civil laws by the Department of Justice and ultimately settled out of court, pointed out the need for more specific statutes and regulations related to the theft of federal fossils.

S. 546 directs the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to manage and protect paleotontological resources using scientific principles. The bill recognizes the non-renewable nature of fossils and defines paleontological resources as fossilized remains preserved in or on the Earth's crust. This distinguishes these resources from archeological resources, covered under the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA); cultural items, covered under the National Historic Preservation Act and the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA); and mineral resources.

If enacted, the bill would establish casual collection provisions including permitting requirements for scientific and educational purposes using uniform and consistent criteria. S. 546 recognizes that paleontological resources are federal property, and that the fossil as well as the associated field data and other records will be preserved and made available to the public. An important aspect of this bill to the Forest Service is its formal recognition of casual collecting of invertebrate and plant fossils for recreational, non-commercial use as a valid public activity on National Forests System lands for which a permit may not be required where the collecting is not inconsistent with the laws governing the management of National Forest System lands and S. 546.

S. 546 provides important uniform criminal and civil penalties for all the federal managing agencies for theft and damage of paleontological resources. Currently, there is a complex mix of laws, regulations and guidelines that have created significant jurisprudential challenges. For example, for the Forest Service, violations of regulations protecting paleontological resources are Class B Misdemeanors, punishable by up to six months imprisonment, or $5,000 fine, or both. For the Bureau of Land Management, violations are Class A Misdemeanors, punishable by up to one year imprisonment, or $100,000 fine, or both. The penalties defined in S. 546 are also consistent with recent amendments to the federal sentencing guidelines of the U.S. Sentencing Commission for increased penalties for cultural heritage resources. S. 546 also provides that the proceeds arising from civil and criminal penalties established under the bill may be available for payment to those who provided information in investigations that lead to the civil violations or criminal convictions for which the penalties were assessed.. However, the current reward language in Section 11 provides a maximum reward amount that we believe will be ineffective in most cases. We believe that the appropriate reward amount to be offered or paid for assistance in investigations is best determined by the agency and prosecutor based on the significance of the case and assistance provided or needed. We_recommend that references to any dollar amount be removed. Further, the Forest Service currently has differing regulations at 36 CFR 262.1 which regulate the payment of rewards along with other Department of Justice protocols.

Mr. Chairman, paleontological resources, especially vertebrate fossils, are heritage resources. They are evidence of the past history of life on Earth. They provide opportunities for the public to learn more about ancient Earth ecosystems and the development of life from research and study of these resources. The Forest Service is a steward of these heritage resources and is committed to their protection while providing opportunities for research, education, and recreation. The Paleontological Resources Preservation Act would help secure the authority of the Forest Service to manage and protect all paleontological resources on National Forest System lands. This concludes my statement. I would be happy to answer questions.

Senator THOMAS. Okay. Thank you. Senator, let's do this a little differently. Let's just take each bill and see if we have questions on the bill as we go. Would that be all right?

The first one I have listed is the Buffalo Soldier Act. It is my understanding that the Department is not in favor of passage of that bill, is that correct?

Mr. Ross. That's correct, sir.

Senator THOMAS. What are your basic criteria for what belongs in a Federal park site that you indicate this one probably does not? Mr. Ross. Well, sir, to the best of my knowledge there has been no study of this to determine suitability or feasibility. We normally will go through a study of various areas as proposed to identify whether they are feasible, suitable, and they meet the criteria of national significance. We have not done so in this particular case. Senator THOMAS. Okay. I suppose the criteria of national significance is a little difficult. I would like to see do you have a list of the criteria that you could give us sometime?

Mr. Ross. I would be glad to provide that for the record, Senator.*

Senator THOMAS. That would be great. I would like to see that. Mr. Ross. I might just add, Senator, by all means we recognize the significance of the Buffalo Soldiers and the contributions they made to the history of this country and the important role they played, but we would just add that to the statement, please. Senator THOMAS. Okay. Thank you.

Senator AKAKA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Ross, with respect to S. 499, relating to the Buffalo Soldier Memorial, I believe you indicated that the administration does not support the bill because it provides that the National Park Service may end up having to provide for its maintenance and upkeep. As I understand the bill, the American Battle Monuments Commission would be authorized to collect private funds to build a memorial. Now, if the bill were changed to eliminate the possibility that the Park Service might have to maintain the memorial, would that address the administration's concern?

Mr. Ross. Senator, Yes, I believe it would, because it would then preclude responsibility for it coming to the National Park Service. Again, we would point out we believe there is a significant story to talk about and to share with the American people, but we don't feel it's appropriate for the National Park Service.

Senator AKAKA. Thank you.

Senator THOMAS. The next bill is S. 546, paleontological resources we need to amend the name, don't we, so it's easier to say

[Laughter.]

*The criteria has been retained in subcommittee files.

Senator THOMAS. What you mentioned, and I understand, I think, Ms. Estill, you mentioned the difficulty of enforcing regulations, or putting in the regulations. Is it a matter of describing them or enforcing them?

Ms. ESTILL. Well, we currently manage under about three different pieces of legislation, which really aren't specific to the fossil resource. One refers to other heritage resources, like archaeological resources, and we can do some undercave protection. I mean, there are a number of things that we operate under, but nothing that is really specific to this fossil resource.

One of the things this does is define it and actually clarify a lot of piecemeal actions that both agencies are taking, both Departments are taking.

Senator THOMAS. We have one of these fossil fields in Wyoming, as a matter of fact, and it's fairly large

Ms. ESTILL. Yes, you do.

Senator THOMAS [continuing]. So I think we have a little bit of a problem enforcing, and I know the local police fly airplanes over once in a while to see what is happening, but-so, it's interesting. Ms. ESTILL. This would help a whole lot in successful prosecution, which then would help in deterring that kind of criminal activity.

Senator THOMAS. But your intention is to define those things that are acceptable for just pick-up and those that are off?

Ms. ESTILL. Absolutely, and make it permissible with no question to allow some amateur collecting.

Senator THOMAS. I see. Okay. Senator.

Senator AKAKA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Kearney, I would like to take a minute to clarify the Department of the Interior's position on S. 546. As you know, the bill is based on recommendations from a report prepared three years ago by the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture. In the last Congress, the Department testified in support of the concept of the bill, but wanted additional changes. I have tried to incorporate almost all of the Department's suggestions from last year. Your testimony this afternoon reiterates that the Department again supports the purpose of the bill. As I understand your statement, the proposed amendments are all either clarifying or technical in nature. If the suggested changes are incorporated, am I correct to understand that the Department of the Interior will support the bill?

Mr. KEARNEY. I think, Senator, at this point what is important is for us to continue to work with the committee to come to a complete resolution on the array of changes that we have still, and concerns we still have, and that point, we would be in a better position to make it absolutely clear what our position is, but certainly, the purposes behind this, certainly what it is trying to achieve I think we are all absolutely in support of that, and in support of your efforts with respect to what the legislation is attempting to achieve in its purposes.

Senator AKAKA. Ms. Estill, following up on the question I just asked Mr. Kearney, you have also testified that the Department of Agriculture supports the purpose of S. 546. Your testimony suggests clarifying the reward provisions in the bill to be consistent