To provide for the conveyance of certain public land in Clark County, Nevada, for use as a heliport.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak on H.R. 849 on behalf of my colleague, the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons), before I make my own remarks on this important piece of legislation.

First, I would like to read a prepared statement by the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons).

Again, on behalf of the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons): ``I would like to express my strong support for H.R. 849 to convey certain public land in Clark County, Nevada, for use as a heliport.

``Nevada is 84 percent owned and managed by the Federal Government. This large share of Federal lands makes management of Nevada's cities and counties difficult at best. Extensive Federal ownership of Nevada, coupled with the rapid growth we are currently experiencing, brings even greater need for planning and management of all types of transportation in Nevada.

``Currently, over 90 helicopter flights per day, over 32,850 flights per year, fly over the homes of 90,000 Las Vegas residents. As you can imagine, this high volume of air traffic poses challenges and problems for the residents of southern Nevada. To help alleviate this problem, Clark County has searched extensively for a separate site that will not only accommodate helicopter operators, but meet the needs of the surrounding communities.

``The heliport site agreed to in this legislation is the result of a great deal of study and planning. Several sites were identified as potentially suitable. However, the site outlined in my legislation is the most ideal location. The site outlined in this legislation is further out of the city and will not affect any of the current residential areas.

``Again, thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your consideration.''

Again, these comments were based upon written remarks from my colleague, the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons).

I would also like to express my strong support for H.R. 849. As an original cosponsor of this bill, I understand the problems that the current helicopter overflight path causes to many of my constituents. With almost 33,000 flights occurring per year over approximately 90,000 people, a viable alternative to the current flight path that not only meets the needs of Southern Nevadans but also the operators of the helicopters themselves is no longer wanted but needed.

In order to solve the conflict, Clark County and other major stakeholders collaborated to find this alternative. After many studies, the site outlined in H.R. 849 was determined to be the most suitable. The area chosen within the legislation moves the flight path away from the residential areas, yet still allows helicopter operators to continue their air tours over Hoover Dam, the Grand Canyon, the Las Vegas Strip, and other beautiful areas of the American Southwest.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to voice my strong support for H.R. 849.

As an original cosponsor of this bill, I understand the problems that the current helicopter over-flight path causes to my constituents. With almost 33,000 flights occurring per year over approximately 90,000 people, a viable alternative to the current flight path that not only meets the needs of Southern Nevadans, but also the operators of the helicopters themselves, is no longer wanted, but needed.

In order to solve the conflict, Clark County and other major stakeholders collaborated to find this alternative. After many studies, the site outlined in H.R. 849 was determined to be the most suitable. The area chosen within the legislation moves the flight path away from residential areas yet still allows helicopter operators to continue their air tours over Hoover Dam, the Grand Canyon, the Las Vegas Strip, and other beautiful areas of the American Southwest.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 849 would transfer certain land, currently within the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area, to Clark County, Nevada. The land is to be used as a heliport for commercial helicopter air tours.

The transfer would only take place if certain conditions on the use of the heliport are met by Clark County.

The first condition is that the County must impose and collect a per passenger ``conservation fee'' of $3.00 for each passenger of a helicopter tour that passes over any portion of the Conservation Area.

The second condition requires the County to ensure that any helicopter tour originating or concluding at the heliport traveling over the Conservation Area fly on a certain flight path and at a specified altitude except for safety reasons.

For purposes of clarity, the conditions set forth in H.R. 849 are on the transfer of the land and should the County fail to fulfill the conditions; the land would either not be transferred or if already transferred would revert back to the United States.

Let us look at each of the conditions on the transfer of the land to Clark County.

The first condition, that the County impose and collect a per passenger fee, is problematic. Elsewhere in law, States or political subdivisions of States are prohibited from levying or collecting a ``tax, fee, or charge . . . exclusively upon any business located a commercial service airport [which includes heliports] . . . other than a tax, fee, or charge wholly utilized for airport or aeronautical purposes.''

Therefore, it seems that the County would be unable to fulfill the first condition of the land transfer as the fee would be imposed upon and collected from helicopter tour passengers for the management of cultural, wildlife and wilderness resources on public land in Nevada.

The second condition is also problematic. Again, this condition would require the County to ensure that certain flight paths and minimum flight altitudes are utilized by the helicopter tours.

It should be emphasized that this bill does not direct Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) action with regard to airspace management and control.

In fact, should the FAA determine that the flight path and minimum altitude requirements set forth in the bill are unsafe or otherwise operationally unwise, the County would have failed to meet a condition of the land transfer and the land would revert back to the United States.

To make this perfectly clear, only the FAA has the authority to manage and control the National Airspace. State, regional, county and other local government entities, not to mention other Federal departments and agencies, have no authority in this regard.

Thus, the second condition on the transfer of land to Clark County is clearly outside of the County's authority and control.

Therefore, given that Clark County may very well be unable to fulfill either of the conditions of the land transfer; it appears that H.R. 849 is legislating a nullity.

I thank my colleagues for the opportunity to be heard on H.R. 849 and to clarify the legislative record with regard to this bill and how it should be interpreted relating to the FAA and airspace management and control.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 849) to provide for the conveyance of certain public land in Clark County, Nevada, for use as a heliport.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 849, introduced by my committee colleague, the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Gibbons), would provide for the conveyance of certain public land in Clark County, Nevada, currently being managed by the Bureau of Land Management, to the county for use as a heliport.

The Las Vegas Valley is among the fastest growing communities in the United States. This community thrives

on tourism with one of the most popular tourist excursions being the helicopter tour of the Grand Canyon. At present, helicopter tour flight paths impact long-standing residential neighborhoods. This bill would alleviate this growing conflict while providing a suitable location for the establishment of a commercial service heliport facility to serve the Las Vegas Valley.

Mr. Speaker, one of the primary goals of this conveyance is to minimize the impact of air tours on the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area and the North McCullough Mountains Wilderness that lie just north of the major residential areas. In addition, any operator of a helicopter tour originating from or concluding at the new heliport would pay the Clark County Department of Aviation a $3 conservation fee for each passenger on the tour if any of the helicopter tours occurs over the Conservation Area. The fee collected will be placed in a special account in the Treasury of the United States. Those funds will then be made available to the Secretary for management of cultural, wildlife, and wilderness resource on public lands in the State of Nevada.

This bill is also the result of public hearings and local decision- making on this issue, and although not a perfect solution, it seeks a fair compromise to resolve the issue.

Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. Porter).

(Mr. PORTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, does the gentlewoman from the Virgin Islands have any more speakers?

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to express my strong support for H.R. 849, to convey certain public land in Clark County, Nevada for use as a heliport. Nevada is 84 percent owned and managed by the federal government. This large share of federal land makes management of Nevada's cities and counties difficult at best. Extensive federal ownership of Nevada coupled with the rapid growth we are currently experiencing brings even greater need for planning and management of all types of transportation.

Currently over 90 helicopter flights per day, or 32, 850 flights per year, fly over the homes of more than 90,000 Las Vegas residents. As you can imagine, this high volume of air traffic poses challenges and problems for the residents of Southern Nevada. To help alleviate this problem, Clark County has searched extensively for a separate site that will not only accommodate helicopter operators, but meet the needs of the surrounding communities. The heliport site agreed to in this legislation is a result of a great deal of study and planning. Several sites were identified as potentially suitable, however the site outlined in my legislation is the most ideal location. The site outlined in the legislation is further out of the city and will not affect any current residential areas. Again, thank you Mr. Speaker for your consideration of this legislation that is so important to Southern Nevada. Additionally, I would like to thank my colleague Mr. Porter for his assistance, as well as the entire Nevada delegation for their support of this bill. I urge all of my colleagues to recognize the need for an alternative helicopter site and join me in supporting this legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, this is important legislation for Nevada that will hopefully alleviate some public safety concerns regarding helicopter overflights. As a result, we do not oppose H.R. 849.

In addition to her other colleagues in Nevada, the Nevada delegation, the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley) is to be commended for her tireless efforts on behalf of this legislation. She continues to be a forceful advocate for managing the explosive growth of her communities effectively and responsibly.

Of course, the distinguished Senate Minority Leader has been a powerful advocate for this legislation, and I know the delegation and the people of Nevada appreciate his leadership.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.