[House Report 106-747]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     106-747

======================================================================



 
                    OREGON LAND EXCHANGE ACT OF 2000

                                _______
                                

 July 17, 2000.--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

                             together with

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

                         [To accompany S. 1629]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(S. 1629) to provide for the exchange of certain land in the 
State of Oregon, having considered the same, report favorably 
thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of S. 1629 is to provide for the exchange of 
certain lands in the State of Oregon.

                          BACKGROUND AND NEED

    S. 1629 authorizes two exchanges of public and private 
lands in Oregon: the Triangle Land Exchange and the Northeast 
Oregon Assembled Land Exchange. Approximately 54,000 acres of 
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Forest Service land is 
proposed to be traded for nearly 50,000 acres currently held by 
private landowners in northeast Oregon. The bill requires that 
the lands to be exchanged be of equal value, or equalized by 
cash payments or a reduction in the amount of private land 
acquired.
    Both the United States and the private landowners will 
benefit from this exchange. The BLM and Forest Service will 
acquire sensitive river corridors which will improve the 
efficiency of their protection efforts for threatened and 
endangered fish. Currently, many of these lands are 
intermingled with private parcels and make resource management 
difficult for the agencies. The improvement of fish-bearing 
streams and riparian areas is critical to the survival of many 
struggling species of fish in the Northwest.
    Communities and landowners will also benefit from these 
exchanges. The consolidation of ownership patterns and the 
release of previously inaccessible forest lands will boost 
local economies and enhance the ability of the private sector 
to manage its own lands.
    The House of Representatives companion legislation to S. 
1629 is H.R. 2950, authored by Congressman Greg Walden (R-OR).

                          LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

    S. 1629 was introduced on September 23, 1999, by Senator 
Gordon Smith (R-OR). On April 13, 2000, the bill passed the 
Senate by unanimous consent. The bill was referred to the 
Resources Committee and within the Committee to the 
Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands and the 
Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health. On May 24, 2000, the 
Full Resources Committee met to consider S. 1629. The two 
Subcommittees were discharged from further consideration of the 
bill by unanimous consent. No amendments were offered, and the 
bill was then ordered favorably reported to the House of 
Representatives by voice vote.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title

    Section (1) contains the short title, the ``Oregon Land 
Exchange Act of 2000.''

Section 2. Findings

    This Section contains Congressional findings.

Section 3. Definitions

    This Section defines terms used in the bill.

Section 4. BLM-Northeast Oregon Assembled Land Exchange

    This Section requires the Secretary of the Interior, upon 
request of the Clearwater partnership, to exchange 
approximately 50,320 acres of federal lands administered by the 
BLM for approximately 44,150 acres of private lands, as 
provided in Section 6. The lands to be exchanged are identified 
on the referenced map.

Section 5. Forest Service-Triangle Land Exchange

    This Section requires the Secretary of Agriculture, upon 
request of the Clearwater partnership, to exchange 
approximately 3,901 acres of federal lands administered by the 
Forest Service for approximately 5,700 acres of private lands 
as provided in Section 6. The lands to be exchanged are 
identified in the referenced map.

Section 6. Land exchange terms and conditions

    Subsection (a) requires the land exchanges to be conducted 
in accordance with Section 206 of the Federal Land Policy and 
Management Act and other applicable laws.
    Subsection (b) provides that any exchange of land may be 
accomplished in a single transaction or in phases.
    Subsection (c) requires completion of exchanges within 90 
days of an agreed upon appraisal.
    Subsection (d)(1) requires appraisals to be determined by 
recognized appraisal standards. Paragraph (2) requires all 
appraisals to determine the best use of the land in accordance 
with the law of the State of Oregon, including use for the 
protection of wild and scenic river characteristics. Paragraph 
(3) requires appraisals to be completed and submitted to the 
appropriate Secretary for approval no later than 90 days after 
the date Clearwater requests the exchange. A summary of each 
appraisal will be available for public inspection. Paragraph 
(4) requires that after the appropriate Secretary approves the 
appraised value of the land conveyed, the land shall not be 
reappraised or updated.
    Subsection (e) requires that the values of the offered land 
and the selected land shall be equal or if not equal, shall be 
equalized. Cash received by the Secretaries may be used to 
purchase land from willing sellers.
    Subsection (g)(1) requires that the land acquired by the 
Secretary of Interior shall be managed in accordance with laws 
and regulations applicable to BLM lands. The land acquired by 
the Secretary of Agriculture shall be managed in accordance 
with laws and regulations applicable to National Forest System 
lands, except lands within the North Fork of the John Day 
subwatershed shall also be managed primarily for fish, 
wildlife, and public recreation. Other uses may occur if the 
Secretary determines that such uses are consistent with, and do 
not diminish, these purposes. This requirement will provide 
additional protection beyond that provided in other applicable 
federal land management regulations and statutes.

Section 7. Authorization of appropriations

    This Section authorizes the appropriation of such sums as 
may be necessary to carry out this bill.

            COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee on Resources' oversight findings and recommendations 
are reflected in the body of the 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 this bill.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

    1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) 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 this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) 
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 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2) 
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this 
bill does not contain any new budget authority, credit 
authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax 
expenditures. According to the Congressional Budget Office, 
enactment of this bill would create new direct spending, but 
``that any such spending would be negligible.''
    3. Government Reform Oversight Findings. Under clause 
3(c)(4) of rule XIII 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 on this bill.
    4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause 
3(c)(3) of rule XIII 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 this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, May 30, 2000.
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 S. 1629, the Oregon 
Land Exchange Act of 2000.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Megan 
Carroll (for federal costs), and Marjorie Miller (for the 
state, local, and tribal impact).
            Sincerely,
                                          Barry B. Anderson
                                    (For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
    Enclosure.

S. 1629--Oregon Land Exchange Act of 2000

    CBO estimates that implementing S. 1629 would have no 
significant impact on the federal budget. Because S. 1629 would 
create new direct spending authority, pay-as-you-go procedures 
would apply, but CBO estimates that any such spending would by 
negligible. S. 1629 contains no intergovernmental or private-
sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
and would have no significant impact on the budgets of state, 
local, or tribal governments.
    S. 1629 provides that upon the request of Clearwater Land 
Exchange--Oregon (an Oregon partnership), the Secretaries of 
the Interior and Agriculture shall exchange certain federal 
lands in the state of Oregon for certain private lands in the 
state. Specifically, the Secretary of the Interior would convey 
about 50,320 acres of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land in 
exchange for about 44,150 acres of private land. In addition, 
the Secretary of Agriculture would convey 3,901 acres of 
federal land within the Malheur National Forest in exchange for 
about 5,700 acres of private land within the Malheur, Wallowa-
Whitman, and Umatilla National Forests. Information from the 
two agencies indicates that the exchanges could affect grazing 
allotments, but CBO estimates that any impact on grazing 
receipts would be insignificant.
    S. 1629 would give the Secretaries the authority to retain 
any cash equalization payments received in these exchanges and 
to spend them, without further appropriation action, to 
purchase other land in Oregon. The Secretaries do not have such 
authority under current law. Therefore, enacting S. 1629 could 
result in new direct spending if the private parties in these 
exchanges were to make cash equalization payments to the 
federal government to complete the transactions. According to 
BLM and the Forest Service, the land exchanges are intended to 
be of equal value and no cash equalization payments are 
planned. Based on that information, CBO estimates that this 
legislation would have no significant effect on direct 
spending.
    On March 8, 2000, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 
1629 as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources on February 10, 2000. The two versions of the 
legislation, and their estimated costs, are identical.
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Megan Carroll 
(for federal costs), and Marjorie Miller (for the state, local, 
and tribal impact). This estimate was approved by Robert A. 
Sunshine, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                    compliance with public law 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                preemption of state, local or tribal law

    This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or 
tribal law.

                        changes in existing law

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

                            ADDITIONAL VIEWS

    While attractive conceptually, exchanging public for 
private land raises a number of serious concerns in practice. 
These concerns persist despite the existence of standards set 
forth in the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLMPA) (43 
U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) and critical assessment of the 
administrative exchange process, most recently by the General 
Accounting Office \1\. Unfortunately, S. 1629 completes two 
relatively large exchanges legislatively, bypassing many of the 
safeguards provided by the administrative exchange process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ See: United States General Accounting Office, Report to the 
Ranking Minority Member, Committee on Resources, House of 
Representatives, BLM and the Forrest Service: Land Exchanges Need to 
Reflect Appropriate Value and Serve the Public Interest, GAO/RCED-00-
73, June, 2000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The two exchanges to be completed by this legislation 
illustrate the difficulties of exchanges in general. For 
example, FLMPA mandates that exchanges involve lands of equal 
or nearly equal value. However, the appraisal process employed 
by federal land management agencies frequently fails to achieve 
this central goal, allowing exchange proponents to fund 
appraisals for public lands they have selected and to keep 
those appraisals secret after the lands have been exchanged. As 
a result, it is frequently unclear if the land being acquired 
by the public is as valuable as the land being traded into 
private hands. In some cases it clearly is not.
    S. 1629 requires further appraisals but specifies that the 
values are to be determined ``in accordance with the law of the 
State of Oregon'' rather than federal law, requires the 
appraisals to be completed within 90 days and limits public 
access to the appraisal results. Therefore, as in many 
exchanges, the public is denied the information required to 
determine accurately whether valuable resources, in this case 
disappearing ``old growth'' forest, are being properly valued 
and this legislation deepens that concern by instituting an 
arbitrary time limit, unusual standards and increased secrecy.
    The involvement of third-party exchange ``facilitators'' 
has also raised questions about the integrity of the exchange 
process in general, and this exchange in particular. Is the 
public well served when a third party selects the public lands 
to be exchanged, rather than the land managers, and then 
oversees all aspects of the exchange process? How can the 
taxpayers be certain that the goals of the facilitator are 
consistent with the public interest? Clearwater Land Exchange, 
a private, for-profit, real estate firm, plays a central role 
in the transactions covered by this legislation.
    While the Administrative exchange process is flawed, 
allowing that process to run its course might have addressed 
some of these questions. At the very least, completion of the 
assessments required by the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) would provide a higher level of 
confidence that the public interest is being well served by 
this exchange. While compliance with NEPA is waived by Congress 
far too often, halting the process midway through completion is 
unwise.
    The House should consider improvements to this legislation 
during consideration of S. 1629. In addition, the Congress 
should heed the concerns raised by the most recent GAO report 
on land exchanges and refrain from legislating further 
exchanges until significant changes in the existing 
administrative exchange process have been made.

                                   George Miller.
                                   Rush Holt.
                                   Frank Pallone, Jr.

                                
