[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 5 (Tuesday, January 19, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H151-H152]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       BLM CONTRACT EXTENSION ACT

  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 3759) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to grant 
economy-related contract extensions of a certain timber contracts 
between the Secretary of the Interior and timber purchasers, and for 
other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 3759

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. QUALIFYING TIMBER CONTRACT OPTIONS.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Qualifying contract.--The term ``qualifying contract'' 
     means a contract that has not been terminated by the Bureau 
     of Land Management for the sale of timber on lands 
     administered by the Bureau of Land Management that meets all 
     of the following criteria:
       (A) The contract was awarded during the period beginning on 
     January 1, 2005, and ending on December 31, 2008.
       (B) There is unharvested volume remaining for the contract.
       (C) The contract is not a salvage sale.
       (D) The Secretary determined there is not an urgent need to 
     harvest under the contract due to deteriorating timber 
     conditions that developed after the award of the contract.
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior, acting through the Director of Bureau of 
     Land Management.
       (3) Timber purchaser.--The term ``timber purchaser'' means 
     the party to the qualifying contract for the sale of timber 
     from lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management.
       (b) Market-related Contract Extension Option.--Upon a 
     timber purchaser's written request, the Secretary may make a 
     one-time modification to the qualifying contract to add 3 
     years to the contract expiration date if the written 
     request--
       (1) is received by the Secretary not later than 90 days 
     after the date of enactment of this Act; and
       (2) contains a provision releasing the United States from 
     all liability, including further consideration or 
     compensation, resulting from the modification under this 
     subsection of the term of a qualifying contract.
       (c) Reporting.--Not later than 6 months after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to 
     Congress a report detailing a plan and timeline to promulgate 
     new regulations authorizing the Bureau of Land Management to 
     extend and renegotiate timber contracts due to changes in 
     market conditions.
       (d) Regulations.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall promulgate new 
     regulations authorizing the Bureau of Land Management to 
     extend and renegotiate timber contracts due to changes in 
     market conditions.
       (e) No Surrender of Claims.--This section shall not have 
     the effect of surrendering any claim by the United States 
     against any timber purchaser that arose under a timber sale 
     contract, including a qualifying contract, before the date on 
     which the Secretary adjusts the contract term under 
     subsection (b).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
Guam (Ms. Bordallo) and the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Guam.


                             General Leave

  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Guam?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, the Nation's recent economic downturn has 
dramatically affected the forest products industry, especially those 
companies reliant on wood from Federal lands. Currently, the Forest 
Service has several options for helping timber companies amend the 
terms of timber contracts that are no longer economically viable. 
However, the Bureau of Land Management does not have the same 
authorities.
  H.R. 3759, introduced by our distinguished colleague from Oregon, 
Representative DeFazio, would help rural economies and struggling 
timber companies by allowing the Secretary of the Interior to add 3 
years to the expiration date of certain BLM timber contracts. This 
authority is similar to the Forest Service authority and would enable 
companies to wait for a better economic climate.

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. Speaker, we commend Representative DeFazio for his efforts to 
support rural communities by proposing this legislation. We support the 
passage of H.R. 3759 and urge its adoption by the House today.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  This particular bill has been well explained by the distinguished 
gentlelady from Guam. Up front, I would like to say that I have 
basically favored this bill introduced by the distinguished gentleman 
from Oregon. In concept, it is a good bill, and I actually will be 
voting for it on the floor. However, I do want to state that there are 
two particular problems, once again, with the process, which are very 
perplexing and

[[Page H152]]

concerning to me, and I think it's something we ought to discuss.
  This bill has been changed--I think significantly--since it left the 
committee on November 18. An amendment was added at 12:58--that is the 
date on it, today. Admittedly, we knew about it maybe an hour before 
that, but an amendment that changes this bill significantly was added 
today. That is not the process you go through. Once again, poor process 
will equate to poor public policy.
  The amendment that was added in here took out salvaged sales on BLM 
land. That is not what was in the bill when it went through committee, 
and I would suggest that I am not in favor of that change to a very 
good bill. We will be told, I'm assuming, that this change was made to 
conform what practices we do on BLM with national forest land. However, 
what we are doing is changing the law to conform to an agency 
regulation, which is, indeed, backwards.
  Congress should be establishing what our requirements are and what 
our practices are, not forcing Congress to try to regulate ourselves 
and relate ourselves to what an agency of government, through its own 
internal regulations, does. So I am opposed to this amendment, which 
was added within the very last 2 hours. That should not be there and 
was not discussed in committee.
  I am also opposed in one particular way to the concept that this was 
made from a ``shall'' to a ``may.'' I would like it very much more had 
it been with the original language that Representative DeFazio proposed 
in making this a ``shall'' issue as opposed to simply making this or 
any other bill that comes before us today into a ``may,'' to make it at 
the whim of the Secretary.
  Now, with those two conclusions, I will say that this is still a good 
bill. This is still a bill that I think should go forward. This is a 
bill that should have gone forward in the way it came out of committee, 
in which it was a stronger and better bill, and I will still vote on it 
on the floor. But I am perplexed with these changes that have been made 
that weaken this bill and do not improve it and, more importantly, with 
the process we are going through to make these last-minute changes when 
they should have been done with full committee hearing, with full 
committee discussion, and full committee markup.
  In closing, let me just apologize for making a misstatement in the 
first place. I am told now that there is a statute that since has been 
done by the National Forest Service, so the statutes are consistent. 
They are consistently wrong, but they are still consistent here. It is 
still the wrong thing to do, and those salvaged sales should have been 
approved on both BLM as well as national forest land, and I still 
resent the process that went through, even though what I said was 
technically wrong earlier.
  With that, I intend to vote ``yes'' because I think the DeFazio bill 
is a good bill. It needs to go forward. It is the right thing to do, 
but we could have done a whole lot better if we had really put our 
minds to it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I again urge Members to support this bill, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from Guam (Ms. Bordallo) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 3759, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  The title of the bill was amended so as to read: ``To authorize the 
Secretary of the Interior to grant market-related contract extensions 
of certain timber contracts between the Secretary of the Interior and 
timber purchasers, and for other purposes.''.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________