[House Report 109-169]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
109th Congress Rept. 109-169
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session Part 1
======================================================================
SMALL TRACTS REFORM ACT
_______
July 14, 2005.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Pombo, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 1905]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 1905) to amend the Small Tracts Act to facilitate the
exchange of small tracts of land, and for other purposes,
having considered the same, report favorably thereon without
amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of H.R. 1905 is to amend the Small Tracts Act
to facilitate the exchange of small tracts of land, and for
other purposes.
Background and Need for Legislation
H.R. 1905 amends the Small Tracts Act and also facilitates
the exchange of two tracts of land. Due to time and expense,
the Forest Service generally only participates in large land
transactions by either acquiring or selling land. The Small
Tracts Act was passed to give the Forest Service the authority
to exchange small parcels of land in an expedited manner. Small
tracts would include mineral fractions, interspersed parcels,
lands affected by encroachment or erroneous surveys, road
rights-of-way, or other parcels of land in which the sale or
exchange is not practicable under any other authority and the
management of the area is inefficient. All transactions require
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, must be
limited to 40 acres of land or less, and the value of land to
be interchanged may not exceed $150,000. These limitations have
made it difficult for the Forest Service to interchange lands,
and H.R. 1905 seeks to alleviate such problems.
As a result of the increasing value of forested land in
some areas, especially in the wildland-urban Interface or near
other metropolitan areas, H.R. 1905 eliminates the cap of
$150,000. This cap was set in 1983 and if adjusted for
inflation would total $286,000 today. Considering the lengthy
process of administrative land exchanges, which generally take
over two years and many times up to a decade, H.R. 1905 also
expands the acreage cap to 100 acres. Additionally, the Small
Tracts Act limits some interchanges to lands transferred out of
federal ownership under ``the mining laws.'' H.R. 1905 would
eliminate this restriction allowing all lands transferred out
of federal ownership regardless of the authorizing statute
(such as the Homestead Act, for example) to be interchanged.
Next, H.R. 1905 directs the Secretary of Agriculture to
acquire two small tracts of land from two private landowners in
the Tahoe National Forest. While the parcels are small enough
to be exchanged under the Small Tracts Act, other antiquated
limitations in the Act would prevent the exchange.
In the first interchange, a private landowner would acquire
the mineral rights to three acres of the surface estate his
family has owned since 1939. In exchange the Forest Service
would acquire seven acres of land adjacent to Tahoe National
Forest's Indian Valley Campground. The Tahoe National Forest
has indicated its interest in obtaining the seven acres in
correspondence to the landowner.
The second land exchange is necessitated by a boundary
adjustment 1935. It would exchange a .87 acre of Forest Service
land located in the landowner's back yard with a .84 acre
parcel that abuts the .87 acre parcel. This would allow the
Forest Service to gain access to a trailhead staging area.
Additionally, the Forest Service has indicated it would be an
attractive exchange in correspondence to the landowner.
Currently, there are no appraisals for the lands in
question. However, any valuation of the land for the Forest
Service must meet the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal
Land Acquisitions. Additionally, any receipts received by the
Forest Service must be deposited into the fund established by
the Sisk Act.
Committee Action
H.R. 1905 was introduced on April 27, 2005, by Congressman
John Doolittle (R-CA). The bill was referred primarily to the
Committee on Resources and additionally to the Committee on
Agriculture. Within the Resources Committee, the bill was
referred to the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health. On
May 11, 2005, the Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill. On
May 18, 2005, the Full Resources Committee met to consider the
bill. The Subcommittee was discharged from further
consideration of the bill by unanimous consent. No amendments
were offered, and the bill was ordered favorably reported to
the House of Representatives by unanimous consent.
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 this report.
Constitutional Authority Statement
Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United
States grants 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, spending
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in tax
expenditures. According to the Congressional Budget Office,
enactment of this bill could result in increased offsetting
receipts, but thee would not exceed $500,000 in any year.
3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. This bill does
not authorize funding and therefore, clause 3(c)(4) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not
apply.
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:
H.R. 1905--Small Tracts Reform Act
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1905 would not
significantly affect the federal budget. The bill could affect
direct spending, but we estimate that any such effects would be
negligible. Enacting H.R. 1905 would not affect revenues. H.R.
1905 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.
The Small Tracts Act authorizes the Forest Service to sell
or exchange small parcels of federal land that meet certain
criteria. H.R. 1905 would expand those criteria to allow the
agency to sell or exchange larger, more valuable parcels under
certain circumstances. By allowing the agency to sell more
valuable land, H.R. 1905 could result in an increase in
offsetting receipts from the sale of such land. However, based
on information from the Forest Service, CBO expects that most
transactions under H.R. 1905 would be completed through
exchanges of equally valued land rather than sales. Therefore,
we estimate that any change in offsetting receipts (a credit
against direct spending) would not exceed $500,000 in any year.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Megan Carroll.
This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy
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.
Committee Correspondence
House of Representatives,
Committee on Resources,
Washington, DC, June 22, 2005.
Hon. Bob Goodlatte,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,
Longworth HOB, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I ask your help in scheduling H.R. 1905,
the Small Tracts Reform Act, for consideration by the House of
Representatives as soon as possible. Authored by John
Doolittle, H.R. 1905 was referred primarily to the Committee on
Resources and additionally to your Committee. The purpose of
H.R. 1905 is to amend the Small Tracts Act to facilitate the
exchange of small tracts of National Forest Service land. With
your help, a similar bill was passed by the House of
Representatives last Congress. The Committee on Resources
ordered the bill reported without amendment on May 18, 2005,
and I hope to file the report on the bill before Congress
adjourns for the July 4th District work period. I have
forwarded a copy of the draft bill report to your staff for
review.
In hopes that the Senate will be able to act on this bill
this Congress, I ask that you allow the Committee on
Agriculture to be discharged from further consideration of the
bill. This action would not be considered as precedent for any
future referrals of similar measures or seen as affecting your
Committee's jurisdiction over the subject matter of the bill.
Moreover, if the bill is conferenced with the Senate, I would
support naming Agriculture Committee members to the conference
committee.
I look forward to your response and would be pleased to
include it and this letter in the report on H.R. 1905.
Sincerely,
Richard Pombo,
Chairman.
------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, DC, July 13, 2005.
Hon. Richard W. Pombo,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
Longworth HOB, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for sending me a draft copy of
the bill report for H.R. 1905, the Small Tracts Reform Act. As
you are aware, the Committee on Agriculture was granted an
additional referral for those provisions falling within its
jurisdiction.
Recognizing your interest in moving this legislation
forward, I agree to discharge the Committee on Agriculture from
further consideration of this bill. I appreciate your
understanding that this discharge does not affect future
referrals to the Committee or its jurisdiction over the subject
matter of the bill. The Committee reserves the right to seek
conferees to the conference committee, should it be necessary,
and I thank you for your support in that regard.
Once again, I am pleased with the cooperation between our
two committees and hope we continue to work together in this
spirit in the future.
Sincerely,
Bob Goodlatte,
Chairman.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
SECTION 3 OF PUBLIC LAW 97-465
(Commonly known as ``Small Tracts Act'')
Sec. 3. The National Forest System lands which may be sold,
exchanged, or interchanged under this Act are those the sale or
exchange of which is [not practicable] either not practicable
or not expedient under any other authority of the Secretary[,
which have a value as determined by the Secretary of not more
than $150,000,] and which are--
(1) [parcels of forty acres] parcels or portions of parcels
of 100 acres or less which are interspersed with or adjacent to
lands which have been transferred out of Federal ownership
[under the mining laws] and which are determined by the
Secretary, because of location or size, not to be subject to
efficient administration;
* * * * * * *
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
While we do not object to the specific goals of this
legislation--to authorize two land exchanges between private
landowners and the U.S. Forest Service involving lands in the
Tahoe National Forest in California--we do object to its
methods of generically amending the Small Tracts Act and
bypassing the Federal Land Policy Management Act.
In the 108th Congress, a bill to authorize the two
California land exchanges, H.R. 4617, was reported by the
Committee with an amendment to strike the changes to the Small
Tracts Act. In addition, H.R. 4617, as reported, required that
the exchanges comply with the Federal Land Policy Management
Act. See: H. Rept. 108-866, Part 1.
H.R. 1905, by contrast, differs in those key respects from
the amended bill which passed by the House on September 29,
2004 with bipartisan support.
Specifically, H.R. 1905 would amend the Small Tracts Act to
remove the tract value limitation of $150,000 as well as to
increase the parcel size of a tract from 40 acres or less to
100 acres or less. Such changes to the Small Tracts Act are not
necessary to achieve the desired results of authorizing the two
land exchanges in California and could have unintended
consequences if applied nation-wide. Moreover, H.R. 1905 fails
to require that the exchanges comply with the Federal Land
Policy Management Act, further reducing safeguards intended to
protect against giveaways of public lands.
Nick Rahall.
Tom Udall.