[House Report 117-673]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


117th Congress    }                                     {       Report
                         HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session       }                                     {      117-673

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


 
                ADVANCING CONSERVATION AND EDUCATION ACT

                                _______
                                

 December 30, 2022.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

         Mr. Grijalva, from the Committee on Natural Resources,
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 2348]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 2348) to maximize land management efficiencies, 
promote land conservation, generate education funding, and for 
other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably 
thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 2348 is to maximize land efficiencies, 
promote land conservation, and generate education funding.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Stemming from the General Land Ordinance of 1785\1\ and the 
Northwest Ordinance,\2\ Congress in its earliest days granted 
each new state certain federal lands to be held in trust by 
that state for the sole purpose of generating income for public 
institutions, in particular for education.\3\ Today, there are 
approximately 46 million acres of state trust lands, 
predominantly in the West. Many of these lands are contained 
within wilderness, national park units, and other federal 
conservation areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\Land Ordinance of 1785, Act of May 20, 1785, 28 J. Cont'l Cong. 
375, available at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/
ampage?collId=lljc&fileName=028/lljc028.db&recNum=386.
    \2\Northwest Ordinance of 1787, Act of July 13, 1787, 32 J. Cont'l 
Cong. 334, available at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/
ampage?collId=lljc&fileName=032/lljc032.db&recNum=343 (expanding upon 
the Land Ordinance of 1785); see also Northwest Ordinance of 1789, Act 
of Aug. 7, 1789, ch. VIII, 1 Stat. 50, 50-51, 51 n.(a), https://
uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm?volume=1&page=50 (Here the 1st U.S. 
Congress reaffirmed--under the new U.S. Constitution--the Northwest 
Ordinance of 1787, which the Congress of the Confederation had 
previously enacted under the Articles of Confederation.).
    \3\Act of May 20, 1785, 28 J. Cont'l Cong. 375, 378 (``There shall 
be reserved [for the United States] the lot N 16, of every township, 
for the maintenance of public schools, within the said township . . . 
.''), available at http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/
ampage?collId=lljc&fileName=028/lljc028.db&recNum=389 and at Library of 
Congress item 90898212, image 3, Cont'l Cong. Broadside Collection 
(Hudson & Goodwin, 1785), https://www.loc.gov/item/90898212/; see also 
Northwest Ordinance of 1787, supra note 2, at art. III, 1 Stat. at 52 
n.(a) (``Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good 
government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of 
education shall forever be encouraged.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Since state trust lands are managed to generate revenues 
and maximize returns for public education, many state trust 
land managers have an interest in exchanging lands within 
federal conservation areas for lands with a higher revenue 
potential. Conversely, federal land management agencies often 
have a strong interest in acquiring state trust lands within 
conservation areas to improve management efficiency and better 
protect environmentally sensitive areas.
    H.R. 2348 would establish a new mechanism for states to 
relinquish state trust lands within federally designated 
conservation areas in exchange for specified public lands 
managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) within the 
state. Currently, the primary means of eliminating state trust 
lands within federally designated conservation areas has been 
through legislative land exchanges that are both time-consuming 
and complicated. Some state trust land managers also oppose new 
conservation designations that do not address state trust land 
inholdings, creating a significant barrier for new 
conservation-focused designations.
    H.R. 2348 would facilitate the expedited removal of state 
trust lands from federal conservation areas and is based on an 
existing provision of federal law (43 U.S.C. Sec. 851) that 
allows states to select other federal lands in lieu of state 
trust lands that are encumbered by settlements or homesteads. 
The bill would expand this provision to apply to all state 
trust lands in 12 western states\4\ and the State of Alaska 
that are contained within federal conservation areas. Upon 
relinquishment by the state, the lands would become a part of 
the applicable conservation area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\The 12 western states are Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, 
Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, 
Washington, and Wyoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The legislation stipulates that the Secretary of the 
Interior has the discretion to accept or reject state 
applications and that all land exchanges must comply with 
applicable laws, including the National Environmental Policy 
Act of 1969 (NEPA). The bill also includes provisions that 
address the valuation of mineral lands, as well as the 
conveyance of mineral lands, mining claims, water rights, and 
grazing permits.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 2348 was introduced on April 1, 2021, by 
Representative Chris Stewart (R-UT). The bill was referred 
solely to the Committee on Natural Resources, and within the 
Committee to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and 
Public Lands. On May 5, 2021, the Natural Resources Committee 
met to consider the bill. The Subcommittee was discharged by 
unanimous consent. No amendments were offered, and the bill was 
adopted and ordered favorably reported to the House of 
Representatives by unanimous consent.

                                HEARINGS

    For the purposes of clause 3(c)(6) of House rule XIII, the 
following hearing was used to develop or consider this measure: 
full Committee markup held on May 5, 2021.

            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 Natural Resources' oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

      COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII AND CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET ACT

    1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act. 
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) and (3) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
sections 308(a) and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974, as well as clause 3(d) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee has received the 
following estimate for the bill from the Director of the 
Congressional Budget Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                  Washington, DC, November 2, 2021.
Hon. Raul M. Grijalva,
Chairman Committee on Natural Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2348, the 
Advancing Conservation and Education Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Janani 
Shankaran.
            Sincerely,
                                         Phillip L. Swagel,
                                                          Director.
    Enclosure.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    

    The bill would:
           Authorize land exchanges between the 
        Department of the Interior and 13 western states
    Estimated budgetary effects would mainly stem from:
           Federal income forgone after land is 
        transferred from federal to state ownership
    Areas of significant uncertainty include:
           Estimating the amount of forgone federal 
        income
           Determining specific locations and values of 
        parcels exchanged
    Bill summary: H.R. 2348 would authorize 13 western states 
to exchange state land located in eligible areas for federal 
land managed by the Department of the Interior (DOI).\5\ The 
bill would direct DOI to establish a process by which states 
can request an exchange. Any conveyances would be subject to 
valid existing rights.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\Those states are Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, 
Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, 
Washington, and Wyoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Estimated Federal Cost: The estimated budgetary effect of 
H.R. 2348 is shown in Table 1. The costs of the legislation 
fall within budget functions 300 (natural resources and 
environment) and 800 (general government).

                                                   TABLE 1.--ESTIMATED BUDGETARY EFFECTS OF H.R. 2348
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         By fiscal year, millions of dollars--
                                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               2022   2023   2024   2025   2026   2027   2028   2029   2030   2031  2022-2026  2022-2031
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Increases in Direct Spending
 
Estimated Budget Authority..................................      0      0      0      0      0      0     10     15     20     25         0         70
Estimated Outlays...........................................      0      0      0      0      0      0     10     15     20     25         0         70
 
                                                     Increases in Spending Subject to Appropriation
 
Estimated Authorization.....................................      1      1      2      2      2   n.e.   n.e.   n.e.   n.e.   n.e.         8       n.e.
Estimated Outlays...........................................      1      1      2      2      2   n.e.   n.e.   n.e.   n.e.   n.e.         8       n.e.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
n.e. = not estimated.

    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the 
legislation will be enacted by the end of calendar year 2021.
    Background: H.R. 2348 would authorize 13 western states to 
relinquish their rights to some of the land that the federal 
government granted them at statehood. In exchange, upon 
relinquishment, the states would be allowed to select DOI land 
of generally equal value or make an equalization payment to the 
federal government if the value of the federal parcel exceeds 
that of the state parcel.
    The bill would require DOI, within 540 days of enactment, 
to establish a process for exchanging the land. Once that 
process is in place, states could submit applications and DOI 
would have three years to make a final determination. During 
that period, the agency would complete appraisals, 
environmental analyses, and other administrative activities. If 
a determination is issued to approve or modify a proposed 
exchange, DOI would enter into a final agreement with the 
affected state and, within one year, convey the federal land. 
Any exchanges would be subject to valid existing rights.
    Direct spending: CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2348 
would reduce offsetting receipts, thus increasing direct 
spending, by $70 million over the 2022-2031 period.
    CBO expects that most of the land that the states would 
relinquish over the next 10 years is surrounded by federal land 
that is designated for conservation--for example, national 
monuments, wilderness areas, or national parks--and that the 
land would not generate significant income for the federal 
government. CBO also expects that most of the federal land 
selected by states would otherwise have generated income for 
the federal government from a variety of activities, such as 
mineral development, renewable-energy development, and timber 
sales. Income generated from those activities is classified in 
the budget as offsetting receipts and recorded as reductions in 
direct spending. Although lands exchanged would generally be of 
equal value, we expect that the federal government would 
relinquish smaller parcels that will generate significant 
receipts for larger parcels that would be designated for 
conservation. Based on timeframes specified under H.R. 2348, 
the first exchanges would be completed in 2028 and the 
transactions would continue for several years.
    Using information from DOI, CBO projects that the federal 
land eligible for selection by states will generate an average 
of $1.25 billion in annual net receipts over the 2021 2031 
period; most of that amount is from mineral leasing.\6\ CBO 
estimates that enacting H.R. 2348 would reduce those receipts 
by a small amount--less than 2 percent each year--starting in 
2028, as land is transferred out of federal ownership. (That 
net amount is inclusive of any equalization payments from 
states.) CBO estimates that, in total, enacting the legislation 
would reduce offsetting receipts by $70million over the 2022-
2031 period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\In many cases, a portion of the receipts generated from 
activities on federal land is paid to the state or county where the 
activities occur. In other cases, agencies can spend all or a portion 
of any receipts generated. This projection represents only the portion 
of receipts that will be deposited into the Treasury.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Spending subject to appropriation: Based on the costs of 
similar activities, CBO estimates that developing the process 
for exchanging the land would cost $1 million in 2022 and $1 
million in 2023. Under the bill, either DOI or the states could 
assume responsibility for covering administrative costs 
associated with the land exchanges. CBO expects that states 
would submit applications to complete a total of 10 to 20 land 
exchanges over the 2024-2026 period; that in most cases DOI 
would cover the associated administrative costs; that the costs 
of completing 75 percentof those exchanges would total about 
$100,000 per exchange; and that the costs of completing larger, more 
complex exchanges would average about $1 million each. In total, CBO 
estimates, implementing H.R.2348 would cost $8 million over the 2022-
2026 period; such spending would be subject to the availability of 
appropriated funds.
    Uncertainty: CBO's estimate of forgone receipts is 
uncertain; actual amounts could be higher or lower. CBO cannot 
predict which specific parcels of federal land states would 
select and cannot accurately project the income those parcels 
will generate over the next 10years. However, because state 
land selections are intended to generate funding for state 
schools, CBO assumes that most of the federal land selected by 
states would have a high potential to generate receipts.
    In addition, CBO has no information on the quantity, 
configuration, or location of state land that would be conveyed 
to the federal government under the bill because those 
decisions have not been made yet and would probably not happen 
until after the bill is enacted. Thus, CBO has no basis for 
estimating land values or identifying the factors the 
government might consider in making a valuation.
    Finally, the budgetary effects of the bill would depend on 
decisions made by officials in the affected states and at DOI. 
Likewise, because decisions about which land would be 
transferred have not been made, CBO has no basis for 
determining whether or to what extent nonfinancial factors 
would affect the decisions made by state governments. CBO also 
has no basis for determining how DOI might exercise its broad 
authority to reject applications.
    Pay-As-You-Go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go 
Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement 
procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or 
revenues. The net changes in outlays that are subject to those 
pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in Table 2.

 TABLE 2.--CBO'S ESTIMATE OF THE STATUTORY PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS OF H.R. 2348, THE ADVANCING CONSERVATION AND EDUCATION ACT, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE
                                                   HOUSE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES ON MAY 5,2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        By fiscal year, millions of dollars--
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              2022   2023   2024   2025   2026   2027   2028   2029   2030   2031  2022-2026  2022-22031
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Net Increase in the Deficit
 
Pay-As-You-Go Effect.......................................      0      0      0      0      0      0     10     15     20     25         0         70
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Increase in long-term deficits: CBO estimates that enacting 
H.R. 2348 would not increase on-budget deficits by more than $5 
billion in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods 
beginning in 2032.
    Mandates: None.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Janani Shankaran; 
Mandates: Lilia Ledezma.
    Estimate reviewed by: Susan Willie, Chief, Natural and 
Physical Resources Cost Estimates Unit; H. Samuel Papenfuss, 
Deputy Director of Budget Analysis; Theresa Gullo, Director of 
Budget Analysis.
    2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goals and 
objectives of this bill are to maximize land efficiencies, 
promote land conservation, and generate education funding.

                           EARMARK STATEMENT

    This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined 
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives.

                 UNFUNDED MANDATES REFORM ACT STATEMENT

    According to CBO, this bill contains no unfunded mandates 
as defined by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

                           EXISTING PROGRAMS

    This bill does not establish or reauthorize a program of 
the federal government known to be duplicative of another 
program.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

               PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL, OR TRIBAL LAW

    Any preemptive effect of this bill over state, local, or 
tribal law is intended to be consistent with the bill's 
purposes and text and the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the 
U.S. Constitution.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

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

        SUPPLEMENTAL, MINORITY, ADDITIONAL, OR DISSENTING VIEWS

    None.

                                  [all]