[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 151 (Thursday, December 11, 2014)]
[House]
[Pages H9050-H9053]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SOLEDAD CANYON SETTLEMENT ACT
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules
and pass the bill (H.R. 5742) to provide to the Secretary of the
Interior a mechanism to cancel contracts for the sale of materials CA-
20139 and CA-22901, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 5742
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Soledad Canyon Settlement
Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) City of santa clarita.--The term ``City of Santa
Clarita'' means the City of Santa Clarita, California.
(2) City of victorville.--The term ``City of Victorville''
means the City of Victorville, California.
(3) Contracts.--The term ``contracts'' means the Bureau of
Land Management mineral contracts numbered CA-20139 and CA-
22901.
(4) Contract holder.--The term ``contract holder'' means
the private party to the contracts, and any successors that
hold legal interests in the contracts.
(5) County of san bernardino.--The term ``County of San
Bernardino'' means the County of San Bernardino, California.
(6) Map.--The term ``Map'' means the map entitled
``Victorville disposal area, California'' and dated March
2011.
(7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
(8) Victorville disposal area.--The term ``Victorville
disposal area'' means the 10,206.05 acres of land identified
for disposal in the West Mojave Land Management Plan (2006)
of the Bureau of Land Management and depicted on the Map.
SEC. 3. APPRAISAL; COMPENSATION TO CONTRACT HOLDER.
(a) Appraisals.--
(1) Contract appraisal.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall determine by
mineral appraisal, using the discounted cash flow method of
appraisal (in accordance with the appraisal guidelines for
appraisals of large quantities of mineral materials contained
in section IV(E) of BLM Mineral Material Appraisal Handbook
H-3630)--
(i) the fair market value of the contracts; and
(ii) the amount of royalties the Federal Government would
receive under the contracts over the 10-year period beginning
on the date of enactment of this Act.
(B) Considerations.--In making the determination under
subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall assume that--
(i) the contract holder has obtained all the permits and
entitlements necessary to mine, produce, and sell sand and
gravel under the contract; and
(ii) mining operations under the contract have commenced at
the time of the determination, with maximum annual production
volumes that--
(I) are based on the projected supply and demand outlook at
the time of determination; and
(II) reflect depletion of the reserves that are subject to
the contract within the effective periods of the contract.
(C) Donation.--The Secretary shall provide to the contract
holder and the City of Santa Clarita a list of approved
appraisers from which the parties shall select and provide
the funding to cover the costs of the appraisal under
subparagraph (A).
(2) Land appraisal.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall determine by
appraisal standards under existing laws and regulations, the
fair market value of the Victorville disposal area on a net
present value basis.
(B) Donation.--The Secretary shall provide to the contract
holder and the City of Santa Clarita a list of approved
appraisers from which the parties shall select and provide
the funding to cover the costs of the appraisal under
subparagraph (A).
(b) Compensation.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), not later than
30 days after completion of the appraisals under subsection
(a), the Secretary shall offer the contract holder
compensation for the cancellation of the contracts.
(2) Conditions on offer.--An offer made by the Secretary
under paragraph (1) shall be subject to the following
conditions:
(A) The cancellation of the contracts and the provision of
compensation shall be contingent on the availability of funds
from the sale of the Victorville disposal area under section
4, and any additional compensation provided under
subparagraph (D), as determined necessary by the Secretary.
(B) The amount of compensation offered by the Secretary
under this subsection shall be equal to or less than the fair
market value of the contracts, as determined under subsection
(a)(1)(A)(i).
(C) The amount of compensation offered by the Secretary
under this subsection shall be equal to or less than the
projected revenues generated by the sale of the Victorville
disposal area under section 4, less the projected lost
royalties to the Federal Government over the 10-year period
beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, as determined
under subsection (a)(1)(A)(ii).
(D) If the amount of projected revenues described in
subparagraph (C) is less than the fair market value
determined under subsection (a)(1)(A)(i), the Secretary
shall, not later than 60 days after the date on which the
Director of the Bureau of Land Management determines the
projected revenues under subparagraph (C), negotiate an
agreement with the contract holder and the City of Santa
Clarita to provide to the Secretary amounts equal to the
difference, in the form of--
(i) compensation to be received by the contract holder; and
(ii) compensation in a form acceptable to the Secretary to
be provided by the City of Santa Clarita.
(3) Acceptance of offer.--
(A) In general.--The contract holder shall have 60 days
from the later of the date on which the Secretary makes the
offer under paragraph (1) or an agreement is negotiated under
paragraph (2)(D) to accept the offer or agreement.
(B) Failure to accept offer.--If the contract holder does
not accept the offer under paragraph (1) or if an agreement
is not negotiated under paragraph (2)(D) within the time
period described in subparagraph (A), the contracts shall
remain in effect and no further actions shall taken be taken
pursuant to this Act.
SEC. 4. SALE OF LAND NEAR VICTORVILLE, CALIFORNIA.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding sections 202 and 203 of
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C.
1712, 1713) and subject to subsections (b) through (f), not
later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act,
the Secretary shall place on the market and offer for sale by
competitive bidding and in a manner designed to obtain the
highest price possible, all right, title, and interest of the
United States in and to the Victorville disposal area.
(b) Availability of Map.--The Secretary shall keep the Map
on file and available for public inspection in--
(1) the office of the Director of the Bureau of Land
Management; and
(2) the district office of the Bureau of Land Management
located in Barstow, California.
(c) Right of Local Land Use Authority To Purchase Certain
Land.--
(1) In general.--Before a sale of land under subsection
(a), the Secretary shall provide to the applicable local land
use authority an exclusive preemptive right, as determined
under State law, to purchase any right, title, or interest of
the United States in and to any portion of the parcels of
land identified as ``Area A'' and ``Area B'' on the Map that
is located within the jurisdiction of the local land use
authority.
(2) Timing.--A preemptive right under paragraph (1) shall
be in effect for a period of 30 days before the land is sold
under subsection (a).
(3) Authority.--During the period described in paragraph
(2), the local land use authority may purchase some or all of
the right, title, and interest of the United States, as
provided in subsection (a), in and to the land to be offered
for sale at fair market value, as determined by an appraisal
conducted by the Secretary.
(4) Exercising right.--If the local land use authority
exercises the preemptive right under paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall convey the land to the local land use
authority immediately on payment by the local land use
authority of the entire purchase price of the applicable
parcel of land.
(5) Failure to pay.--Failure by the local land use
authority to purchase and pay for the right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to the land described in
paragraph (1) within the time period described in paragraph
(2) and to comply with any other terms and conditions as the
Secretary may require shall terminate the preemptive right of
the local land use authority with respect to the right,
title, and interest offered for sale.
(d) Withdrawal and Reservation.--
(1) Withdrawal.--Subject to valid existing rights, the land
described in subsection (a) is withdrawn from--
(A) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land
laws;
(B) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
(C) operation of the mineral leasing, mineral materials,
and geothermal leasing laws.
(2) Reservation.--In any sale or other disposal of land
under this section, there shall be reserved by the United
States the right of
[[Page H9051]]
the United States to prospect for, mine, and remove minerals
from the conveyed land.
(e) Consultation.--In addition to any consultation
otherwise required by law, before initiating efforts to
dispose of land under this section, the Secretary shall
consult with the City of Victorville, the County of San
Bernardino, and surface owners in the jurisdiction in which
the land is located regarding the potential impact of the
disposal and other appropriate aspects of the disposal.
(f) Account.--The gross proceeds of a sale of land under
subsection (a) shall be deposited in an account acceptable to
the Secretary and available only for the purposes of carrying
out this Act.
SEC. 5. CANCELLATION OF CONTRACTS.
(a) In General.--On completion of the compensation to the
contract holder for the value of each contract in accordance
with subsection (b), the Secretary shall cancel the contracts
and withdraw those areas that were subject to the contracts
from further mineral entry under all mineral leasing and
sales authorities available to the Secretary.
(b) Compensation; Cancellation; Retention of Funds.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (3), the Secretary
shall provide to the contract holder the compensation agreed
to under section 3(b) by disbursement of amounts from the
account, in 4 equal payments, as funds are available;
(2) Cancellation.--
(A) Contract ca-20139.--On completion of the first 2
payments to the contract holder under paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall cancel contract CA-20139.
(B) Contract ca-22901.--On completion of the remaining 2
payments to the contract holder under paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall cancel contract CA-22901.
(3) Retention of funds.--The Secretary shall retain
sufficient funds to cover the projected lost royalties
determined under section 3(a)(1)(A)(ii).
(c) Release and Waiver.--Upon acceptance and receipt of
compensation under subsection (b), the contract holder shall
waive all claims against the United States arising out of, or
relating to, the cancellation of the contracts.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Washington (Mr. Hastings) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
Sherman) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
General Leave
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their
remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Washington?
There was no objection.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, we are here today to address the Soledad Canyon
Settlement Act, H.R. 5742, as introduced by our colleague from
California (Mr. McKeon). This bipartisan bill will solve a longstanding
controversy surrounding a pair of sand and gravel leases located near
the community of Santa Clarita, California.
In 1990, the Bureau of Land Management, or BLM, issued two leases for
sand and gravel mines to CEMEX. At the time, this area was much more
remote than it is today. As CEMEX was preparing a plan of operation, it
became clear to all parties involved that local community development
had made the project incompatible with the local community. Local
community leaders, the region's congressional delegation, and the
company have all worked for more than a decade to find a legislative
solution to make the company and Federal Government whole while
returning the lease to the Federal Government.
As a result, we are here today to move forward with a plan to cancel
these leases while at the same time making both the contract holder and
the Federal Government whole. This legislation has the strong support
of State and local communities, the contract holder, and the regional
congressional delegation.
Now while this bill has just recently been introduced, it is the
product of years of hard work and careful communication and review by
the committee. The gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) has been a
tireless advocate on behalf of his local communities. He has
demonstrated patience and diligence in pursuing a workable solution
that the Congress can successfully act upon. I am confident that the
community of Santa Clarita already knows just how fortunate they have
been to have had Mr. McKeon as their Congressman for 11 terms.
Now, it is also my understanding, Mr. Speaker, that the gentlewoman
from California, Senator Boxer, shares Mr. McKeon's commitment to this
legislation, and I hope that she will be able to follow his lead before
the end of this Congress by shepherding this bill through the Senate.
This bill deserves the support of both the House and the Senate.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the bill and would
like to hear from the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), so I will
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield
such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr.
McKeon), the author of this legislation, the chairman of the Armed
Services Committee.
Mr. McKEON. I thank Chairman Hastings for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege to speak on my bill, H.R. 5742,
the Soledad Canyon Settlement Act. I appreciate the opportunity to
appear before the House, and I want to thank Speaker Boehner, Majority
Leader McCarthy, and Chairman Hastings for their steadfast support of
this legislation. Without their support, we wouldn't be standing here
today on the floor with this bill.
I would also like to thank the gentlewoman from California, Senator
Boxer, for her efforts in finding an agreeable solution for the
inclusion of language that brought the score of the bill to zero. And I
second the remarks of Chairman Hastings and hope that she will be able
to bring this to a conclusion in the final days that the Senate is in
session. One of the things that Senator Boxer added to this bill was
introducing legislation that brought the cost of this bill to zero.
Crossing that hurdle has moved us to this point now in solving this
intractable issue.
Finally, I would like to thank the gentleman from California,
Congressman Sherman, for his support of my legislation. I continue to
believe in bipartisanship as the way to address critical issues for our
constituents, and we have shown time and again that we can find common
ground if we try.
Mr. Speaker, the Soledad Canyon mine, operated by CEMEX, is located
just outside the city of Santa Clarita, California, in the 25th
Congressional District that I have had the opportunity to represent now
for the last 22 years. Under two current contracts held by CEMEX, they
are authorized to extract approximately 56 million tons of sand and
gravel over a 20-year period, with two 10-year contracts.
Residents of my congressional district and city leaders have been
expressing their concerns for the past 24 years about a large mine
operating in close proximity to where they live. And, as the chairman
mentioned, this has become much closer over the years. They fear the
effects of pollution, increased truck traffic, and environmental health
issues on their families and the community. Throughout my 22 years in
Congress, I have worked endlessly to find a solution. I have engaged
with civic leaders, residents of my district, environmental leaders,
the county of Los Angeles, CEMEX, BLM, the Department of the Interior,
Chairman Hastings, and the leadership of our conference.
Mr. Speaker, allow me to give just a bit of background on the
situation that has arisen in my district. In 1990, two privately held
valid Federal contracts were awarded to Transit Mixed Concrete.
Southdown, the parent company of Transit Mixed Concrete, was acquired
by CEMEX in 2000, resulting in CEMEX holding the Federal contracts.
The Bureau of Land Management approved a mining plan of operations
and prepared a draft environmental impact statement with respect to the
Soledad Canyon mine, which was released on May 6, 1999. The
environmental impact statement was subsequently modified to address the
growing concerns among Santa Clarita residents about the impact that
mining operations in Soledad Canyon have on air quality and health,
truck traffic, and declining property values in Santa Clarita. The
final environmental impact statement was released to the public on June
2, 2000, with a list of eight alternatives for mining the Soledad
Canyon site.
Under the California Environmental Quality Act, the county of Los
Angeles
[[Page H9052]]
completed the environmental impact report in 2001 and subsequently
voted in 2002 to deny the permit, citing the right and responsibility
of the county to impose reasonable environmental and resource
protection and regulation on mining in Soledad Canyon.
Numerous lawsuits were filed between 2002 and 2004 involving the city
of Santa Clarita, the county of Los Angeles, the Center for Biological
Diversity, and CEMEX. A consent degree resulted from the settlement of
CEMEX, Inc. v. County of Los Angeles in 2004. The consent decree
contains the mitigation agreement between CEMEX and the county of Los
Angeles, which lists 40 conditions that CEMEX is required to meet in
order to mitigate the environmental, health, traffic, endangered
species, and safety concerns raised by the county, local residents, and
the city of Santa Clarita.
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned before, I have worked throughout my
entire congressional career to bring all parties together to work out a
deal that is mutually beneficial. I have introduced eight bills on this
issue over the years, each of which took a different approach to
dealing with the mine as new issues arose.
In the 106th Congress, I introduced H.R. 3060, which would have
withdrawn specified lands from the operation of Federal mining and
mineral leasing laws and would have nullified any existing permits
issued on those lands. The same bill was introduced as H.R. 679 in the
107th Congress. In the 108th Congress, I introduced H.R. 3529, the
Soledad Canyon Mine Lease Cancellation Act. This legislation would have
canceled the two mining permits for the Soledad Canyon mine and would
have prohibited the Secretary of the Interior from issuing permits for
mining above historical levels in Soledad Canyon.
In the 109th Congress, I introduced H.R. 5471, the Soledad Canyon
Mine Leases Adjustment Act. This legislation would have canceled the
two mining permits for the Soledad Canyon mine, directed the Secretary
of the Interior to provide additional financial and mineral production
opportunities in exchange for the economic value invested to that date
on the two permits, and would have prohibited the Secretary of the
Interior from issuing permits for mining above historical levels in
Soledad Canyon.
In the 110th Congress, I introduced H.R. 5887, the Soledad Canyon
Mine Act. This legislation would have authorized the Secretary of the
Interior to cancel the two mining contracts, prohibited future mining
in Soledad Canyon, provided a means for CEMEX to recover just
compensation for the cancelation of the contracts, provided the Bureau
of Land Management with the necessary tools to verify the expenses
incurred by CEMEX, provided relief to CEMEX for such expenses, and
provided for a dispute resolution process.
{time} 0930
In the 111th Congress, I introduced H.R. 4332, the Soledad Canyon
High Desert, California Public Lands Conservation and Management Act of
2009. This legislation had a similar set of actions as H.R. 5887, but
added two notable ones: it provided a mechanism to offer for sale, by
competitive bidding, lands identified for disposition near Victorville,
California; and to acquire environmentally-sensitive land and collect
the proceeds of the sale of lands near Victorville, California.
Finally, in the 112th Congress, I introduced H.R. 6469, the Soledad
Canyon Mine Mitigation and Relocation Act of 2012. This legislation
would have begun a study of the legal and administrative steps--
including obtaining sufficient funding--necessary to carry out the
goals of the Soledad Canyon High Desert, California Public Lands
Conservation and Management Act of 2009, H.R. 4332.
I mention each of these in order to illustrate how the tug and pull
of all parties influenced the legislative process. Each party gave
ideas to further perfect legislation that would finally solve this
vexing issue that affects the residents of my district.
I believe because of all our joint efforts, we have reached a
critical mass on this issue. It is time for a solution once and for
all. I am looking forward to the full House acting on H.R. 5742 today,
a solution that would take the mine out of commission and lift this two
decades' long burden off the backs of my constituents.
This is a solution borne from the great compromise between the city
of Santa Clarita and CEMEX, who each offered to put up the difference
in cost to bring the cost of the bill to zero. This zero score is
critical to the bill's success and couldn't have been achieved without
the partnership that has developed over the many years of action on
this matter.
The bill achieves all the aims of my previous legislation,
particularly H.R. 4332, with the solution to the vexing issue of how to
ensure there is no cost to the Federal Government.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation. I
thank the gentleman again for allowing me the time to explain this
critical issue in my district and thanks again to our House leadership
and Chairman Hastings for bringing this legislation to the floor.
Mr. SHERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Soledad Canyon Settlement Act.
This act is a testament to bipartisanship, fiscal responsibility,
environmental stewardship, local consensus building, and tireless
tenacity for the public good.
Bipartisanship: Here in this House, the bill is introduced, carried,
and written by our colleague, Buck McKeon. In the Senate, the same
language has been introduced by Senator Barbara Boxer and is supported
by Senator Feinstein. You can't get any more bipartisan than that.
Fiscal responsibility: CBO says this bill costs the government zero
dollars and zero cents. You can't get a lower cost estimate on a bill
than that.
Environmental stewardship: this bill is supported by the Sierra Club,
and this land will become the gateway to the new San Gabriel Mountains
National Monument.
Local consensus building: this bill has the support of local leaders
and legislators, Governor Jerry Brown, CEMEX, the local lease owner,
and virtually everyone involved in public life in Santa Clarita, which
is Los Angeles County's third largest city.
Tireless tenacity: Mr. Speaker, tireless tenacity for the public good
is exemplified by our friend, Buck McKeon, 22 years in Congress and I
believe 22 years focused on this problem, and now, on what may very
well be his last legislative day, we have a chance to solve this
problem in a way that I think exemplifies what we should be trying to
do here in Congress.
In addition to Buck's tireless tenacity, I want to commend the city
leaders of Santa Clarita, many-time Mayor Laurene Weste, who I believe
is now a city council member and has been mayor of that city so often;
Bob Keller, now the mayor pro tem; Ken Striplin, the city manager; and
hundreds and thousands of people in Santa Clarita and the immediate
area.
Mr. Speaker, this is a bill that is needed because it will stop the
mining of 56 million tons of sand and gravel, which is now incompatible
with a city that has grown to more than double its size when the
project was originally planned, and now constitutes an area of well
more than a quarter million people.
This sand and gravel mining operation is incompatible with the new
population of the area, and it is also incompatible with the roads and
traffic which is busy not only at rush hour, but throughout the day.
I want to commend the gentleman from Santa Clarita for his decades of
work for his district, and all the people of California.
Mr. Speaker, I urge an ``aye'' vote on the Soledad Canyon Settlement
Act, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance
of the time.
Mr. Speaker, as Mr. McKeon pointed out, this has been a long process
for a vexing problem in Santa Clarita, and Mr. Sherman pointed out very
well that Mr. McKeon is to be commended for this, and this would be
kind of the capstone on the career that he has.
All that is left if this House adopts this measure is very simply for
the other body to take it up, and with the interests that Senator Boxer
has shown on this issue, I hope that she can
[[Page H9053]]
move this legislation through the Senate.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5742.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________