A new report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has sharply raised the stakes for the future of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in southern Utah.
The Jan. 15 report concluded that the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) recently adopted Resource Management Plan (RMP) qualifies as a “rule” under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and is therefore subject to the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The finding means Congress could attempt to nullify the monument’s management framework through a simple majority vote—an unprecedented step for a national monument plan.
The GAO opinion is in response to a July 2025 request from Rep. Celeste Maloy (R-UT-02) asking whether Congress has authority under the CRA to overturn the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument Record of Decision and Approved RMP, according to environmental groups.
What the GAO decided
The GAO report addresses a narrow legal question: whether the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument Record of Decision and Approved RMP qualifies as a rule that must be submitted to Congress under the CRA before taking effect. The CRA applies to agency rules and allows Congress, within a limited timeframe, to overturn them through a joint resolution of disapproval.
To answer that question, GAO applied the definition of a rule found in the APA, which the CRA incorporates. Under that definition, a rule is an agency statement that applies in the future and is designed to implement, interpret or prescribe law or policy. GAO concluded that the monument management plan meets each of these elements.
First, GAO found that the plan is an agency action. Although the plan implements presidential proclamations issued under the Antiquities Act restoring the monument’s boundaries, GAO determined that the BLM acted under its own independent authority granted by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA). That authority requires BLM to develop land-use plans, evaluate alternatives, and make discretionary decisions about how public lands are managed.
Because BLM exercised that discretion when it developed and selected the final management alternative, GAO concluded the plan is properly attributed to the agency rather than to the president.
Second, GAO determined that the plan has future effect. The report explains that the plan establishes a long-term framework governing how lands within the monument will be managed going forward. Once signed, the plan guides subsequent decisions on land use, access and resource protection across the monument, rather than addressing only past or one-time actions.
Third, GAO concluded that the plan implements and prescribes policy. The report points to numerous examples, including the designation of management zones, closure of large areas to off-highway vehicle use, limits on camping, restrictions on recreational shooting, determinations about grazing availability and withdrawal of lands from mineral and geothermal leasing. GAO found these provisions establish binding policy choices affecting how public lands may be used, satisfying the final element of the APA definition.
Finally, GAO found that the plan substantially affects non-agency parties by altering permissible uses and access across nearly 1.9 million acres, placing it outside the CRA’s procedural-rule exemption.
As a result, GAO concluded that the national monument management plan is a rule subject to the CRA’s submission and review requirements. The report does not invalidate the RMP but clarifies that Congress has authority to review it under the CRA.
Monument designation and history
The Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument was established in 1996 to protect geological, ecological, paleontological and cultural resources across approximately 1.9 million acres of southern Utah. It was the first national monument managed by the BLM and later became a cornerstone of the agency’s National Conservation Lands system.
In December 2017, a presidential proclamation reduced the monument’s boundaries by roughly 47%. In October 2021, a subsequent proclamation restored the monument to its original size. Following that restoration, BLM initiated a new land-use planning process in 2022 to develop a management plan consistent with the restored boundaries, the Antiquities Act proclamations and FLPMA.
BLM finalized the current RMP in January 2025 after conducting environmental analysis and public involvement required by federal law. According to GAO’s report, the plan governs approximately 1.87 million acres of BLM-administered land and establishes management direction intended to protect monument objects while guiding allowable uses and activities.
Environmental groups response
Environmental organizations cited the GAO report as significant for the future of monument management. Steve Bloch, legal director at the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, said the decision confirms that the monument management plan could be subject to congressional action despite years of planning and public involvement.
Axie Navas, director of designation campaigns at The Wilderness Society, said the organization views the management plan as essential to protecting the monument’s resources and ensuring public access for future generations.
Earthjustice senior attorney Tom Delehanty said the plan was developed through collaboration among Tribes, local governments and stakeholders to provide certainty in how the monument is managed, and warned that overturning it would remove that framework.
WLJ reached out to Maloy’s office regarding whether she or any other Utah Congress members plan to move forward with proposing a CRA on the monument, but did not receive a response before press time. — Charles Wallace, WLJ contributing editor
