[House Report 105-810]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                     105-810
_______________________________________________________________________


 
        OREGON PUBLIC LANDS TRANSFER AND PROTECTION ACT OF 1998

                                _______
                                

October 12, 1998.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________


  Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 4326]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 4326) to transfer administrative jurisdiction over 
certain Federal lands located within or adjacent to the Rogue 
River National Forest and to clarify the authority of the 
Bureau of Land Management to sell and exchange other Federal 
lands in Oregon, having considered the same, report favorably 
thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purposes of H.R. 4326 is to transfer administrative 
jurisdiction over certain federal lands located within or 
adjacent to the Rogue River National Forest and to clarify the 
authority of the Bureau of Land Management to sell and exchange 
other federal lands in Oregon.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Title I of H.R. 4326 provides for the transfer of 
administrative jurisdiction over certain public lands in the 
State of Oregon located within or adjacent to the Rogue River 
National Forest. It is not a land exchange as normally thought 
of, but rather a transfer of jurisdiction of federal lands 
between two agencies. It transfers specified lands within the 
Rogue River National Forest System in Oregon from public domain 
status as administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 
to the National Forest, and it transfers other lands from the 
National Forest to public domain status. The intent of the bill 
is to provide management consolidation for both the Forest 
Service and BLM. Title I was originally introduced as H.R. 
3186.
    Title II of H.R. 4326 was originally introduced as H.R. 
3542. This title provides for the protection of Oregon and 
California railroad land grants (O&C lands) by clarifying BLM's 
authority to make sales and exchanges of these federal lands in 
the State of Oregon. The bill modifies the sales and exchange 
authority of the Secretary of the Interior by placing 
limitations on the acreage sold and exchanged, and on which 
lands are to be sold and exchanged. No O&C lands located within 
a Congressional designated wilderness area; a National Wild and 
Scenic River System; or an area of critical environmental 
concern designated by the Secretary under the Federal Land 
Policy Management Act can be sold or exchanged. The bill also 
sets the price and procedures necessary to complete a land 
sale, and sets the priority of lands for acquisition such as 
lands adjacent to streams, riparian areas and wildlife 
corridors. In addition, title II ensures that the total values 
of the lands exchanged or sold is equalized by requiring 
equalization payments. This title also redesignates public 
domain lands for treatment as revested lands and establishes 
the manner in which timber and surface resource revenue from 
these lands are to be distributed.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 4326 was introduced on July 24, 1998, by Congressman 
Robert Smith (R-OR). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Resources. On July 29, 1998, the Full Resources Committee met 
to consider H.R. 4326. No amendments were offered and the bill 
was then ordered favorably reported to the House of 
Representatives by voice vote.

            COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    With respect to the requirements of clause 2(l)(3) of rule 
XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and clause 
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, 
the Committee on Resources' oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

                   CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

    Article I, section 8 and Article IV, section 3 of the 
Constitution of the United States grant Congress the authority 
to enact H.R. 4326.

                        COST OF THE LEGISLATION

    Clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the 
Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out 
H.R. 4326. However, clause 7(d) of that rule provides that this 
requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in 
its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill 
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                     COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XI

    1. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(B) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, H.R. 
4326 does not contain any new budget authority, credit 
authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax 
expenditures. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that 
enactment of this bill would increase direct spending, based on 
different receipt-sharing programs with the State of Oregon and 
certain counties in the State. However, the increase would be 
insignificant over the 1999-2003 time period.
    2. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(D) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and 
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on the subject of H.R. 4326.
    3. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(C) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R. 
4326 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

               CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                Washington, DC, September 22, 1998.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources, House of Representatives, Washington, 
        DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4326, the Oregon 
Public Lands Transfer and Protection Act of 1998.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Victoria V. 
Heid (for federal costs), and Marjorie Miller (for the state 
and local impact).
            Sincerely,
                                         June E. O'Neill, Director.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 4326--Oregon Public Lands Transfer and Protection Act of 1998

    Summary: H.R. 4326 would transfer administrative 
jurisdiction over certain Federal lands in the State of Oregon 
between the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the U.S. Forest 
Service. The bill also would direct the Secretary of the 
Interior to redesignate the legal status of certain Federal 
land in the State. The redesignation in land status would in 
some cases affect Federal payments to the State of Oregon and 
counties in the State. H.R. 4326 also would limit the Secretary 
of the Interior's authority to sell, purchase, or exchange 
certain Federal land managed by BLM in Oregon.
    CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 4326 would increase direct 
spending by about $14 million over the next 10 years. We 
estimate that the bill would have a small impact on direct 
spending over the 1999-2003 period but would increase direct 
spending by almost $3 million a year beginning in fiscal year 
2004. Because the bill would affect direct spending, pay-as-
you-go procedures would apply.
    H.R. 4326 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on State, local, or tribal 
governments.
    Background: Under current law, offsetting receipts 
generated from Federal land result in payments to states and 
counties based on formulas specific to the Federal land 
category. H.R. 4326 would affect three categories of Federal 
land in Oregon: National Forest System (NFS) lands, which are 
managed by the U.S. Forest Service (within the Department of 
Agriculture); public domain (PD) lands, which are managed by 
BLM (within the Department of the Interior); and revested 
Oregon and California (O&C) Railroad grant lands, which are 
managed by BLM or the Forest Service.
    Under current law, amounts equivalent to 25 percent of 
offsetting receipts from NFS land are distributed to states for 
the benefit of counties; amounts equivalent to 5 percent of net 
receipts generated on PD land are distributed to the states; 
and amounts equivalent to 50 percent of receipts from Oregon 
and California grant lands are distributed to counties. 
However, a different payment process is temporarily in effect 
for counties in which federal land is affected by decisions 
related to the northern spotted owl. Under the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1993 (OBRA-93), those counties receive a 
special guaranteed payment through fiscal year 2003 based on 
the historic levels of receipt-sharing payments. Beginning in 
fiscal year 2004, those guaranteed special payments will end 
and the underlying receipt-sharing formulas will take effect 
again.
    Description of the bill's major provisions: Title I would 
change the administration of about 8,950 acres of Federal lands 
within the Rogue River National Forest in Oregon by 
transferring jurisdiction between BLM and the Forest Service. 
Title I also specifies the legal category of the transferred 
lands, each of which has an associated receipt-sharing formula. 
Implementing these changes in land status would alter the 
receipt-sharing formula for 3,690 acres: 2,058 acres currently 
categorized as PD land would be redesignated as NFS land, and 
1,632 acres currently categorized as NFS land would be 
redesignated as PD land. Of the 3,690 acres affected by these 
changes, 235 acres are temporarily subject to the OBRA-93 
special payments for lands affected by Federal decisions 
regarding the northern spotted owl. After 2003, the bill would 
result in a net increase of 426 acres subject to the more 
generous NFS formula instead of the PD formula.
    Title II would affect how certain Federal land is 
categorized and managed within six BLM districts: Medford, 
Roseburg, Eugene, Salem, Coos Bay, and the Klamath Resource 
Area within the Lakeview district. The bill would require that 
the Secretary, no later than September 30, 1999, designate all 
PD land that is timberland within those areas (about 240,000 
acres) as O&C land. The bill specifies that any payments based 
on receipts from the redesignated Oregon and California grant 
lands that are generated before the end of fiscal year 2003 
would continue to be calculated as if they had been generated 
from PD land. Payments based on receipts generated after fiscal 
year 2003 from the redesignated Oregon and California grant 
lands would be disbursed to the Association of Oregon and 
California Land Grant Counties for redistribution to the 
counties, net of administrative costs.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: CBO estimates 
that enacting H.R. 4326 would increase direct spending by about 
$14 million over the next 10 years as a result of additional 
payments to Oregon and certain counties in the state. The 
increase in direct spending would be insignificant over the 
1999-2003 period. Beginning in fiscal year 2004, direct 
spending would increase by almost $3 million each year.
    CBO estimates that title I would increase payments to 
Oregon and counties within the state, but that the increase 
would be less than $500,000 a year. Once the special guaranteed 
payments to counties affected by northern spotted owl decisions 
expire at the end of 2003, title I would make more federal 
acreage subject to the 25-percent receipt-sharing formula. For 
purposes of this estimate, CBO assumes there will be no 
significant change in the current restrictions on timber 
harvests affected by the northern spotted owl decisions. 
Because little timber is being harvested on those lands now, we 
estimate that a more generous receipt-sharing formula on those 
acres would not result in a significant increase in payments to 
Oregon in fiscal year 2004 or over the 1999-2008 period.
    Title II would recategorize about 240,000 acres of federal 
land in Oregon from PD to O&C status. The bill provides that 
this redesignation not affect payments based on offsetting 
receipts until after fiscal year 2003. Because O&C land is 
subject to a more generous receipt-sharing formula than PD 
land, federal payments to Oregon would increase after 2003. 
Based on information from BLM, we estimate that payments to 
Oregon and counties in the state would increase by almost $3 
million a year beginning in fiscal year 2004 and by a total of 
about $14 million over the 2004-2008 period.
    Provisions in title II affecting the Secretary's authority 
to sell, purchase, or exchange certain lands could affect 
direct spending (including offsetting receipts) if they 
resulted in changes to timber harvests on federal land and the 
associated payments to states and counties. However, we 
estimate that any such effects would likely be insignificant 
over the next five years.
    The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 
300 (natural resources and the environment) and 800 (general 
government).
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and 
Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up pay-as-you-go procedures 
for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts. The net 
changes in outlays and governmental receipts that are subject 
to pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the following table. 
For the purposes of enforcing pay-as-you-go procedures, only 
the effects in the current year, the budget year, and the 
succeeding four years are counted.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      By fiscal years, in millions of dollars--
                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      1998   1999   2000   2001   2002   2003   2004   2005   2006   2007   2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes in outlays.................      0      0      0      0      0      0      3      3      3      3      3
Changes in receipts................                                 Not applicable
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments: 
H.R. 4326 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in 
UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments. CBO estimates that enactment of this bill would 
increase certain payments to the state of Oregon and counties 
in that state by almost $3 million each year beginning in 
fiscal year 2004.
    Estimated impact on the private sector: This bill would 
impose no new private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Victoria V. Heid. 
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie 
Miller.
    Estimate approved by: Paul N. Van de Water, Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    compliance with public law 104-4

    H.R. 4326 contains no unfunded mandates.

                        changes in existing law

    If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing 
law.