[Senate Report 118-63]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                   Calendar No. 137

118th Congress}                                            { Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session  }                                            { 118-63

======================================================================
 
                      BUFFALO TRACT PROTECTION ACT

                                _______
                                

                 July 19, 2023.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

         Mr. Manchin, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 
                   Resources, submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 534]

    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 
referred the bill (S. 534), to withdraw certain Bureau of Land 
Management land from mineral development, having considered the 
same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and 
recommends that the bill do pass.

                                PURPOSE

    The purpose of S. 534 is to withdraw approximately 4,288 
acres of federal land administered by the Bureau of Land 
Management in Sandoval County, New Mexico from mineral 
development.

                          BACKGROUND AND NEED

    In 2012, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) released a 
draft of the new resource management plan (RMP) for BLM lands 
in central New Mexico, which proposed to open four parcels, 
including the Buffalo Tract and Crest of the Montezuma, in 
southern Sandoval County to mineral development, including 
gravel mining. Since the release of the draft plan, some local 
residents and stakeholders have expressed concerns about a 
gravel mine on this land.
    S. 534 would withdraw approximately 4,288 acres of land 
administered by the BLM near Placitas, New Mexico, from 
location, entry, and patent under the mining laws and 
disposition under the mineral leasing, mineral materials, and 
geothermal leasing laws. In 2019 testimony on a previous 
version of the bill, S. 526 in the 116th Congress, the BLM 
projected that a final environmental impact statement and 
Record of Decision for the RMP would be released by the end of 
the year. Since that time, the planning process has been 
paused.

                          LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

    S. 534 was introduced by Senators Heinrich and Lujan on 
February 27, 2023. Similar legislation, S. 180, was introduced 
in the 117th Congress by Senators Heinrich and Lujan on 
February 2, 2021. The Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, 
and Mining held a hearing on S. 180 on October 19, 2021. The 
Committee ordered S. 180 reported favorably without amendment 
on November 18, 2021 (S. Rept. 117-60). Representatives 
Stansbury, Leger Fernandez, McNerney, and Huffman introduced an 
identical bill, H.R. 5805, on November 1, 2021.
    In the 116th Congress, Senators Heinrich and Udall 
introduced a similar bill, S. 526, on February 14, 2019. The 
Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining held a 
hearing on S. 526 on May 14, 2019 (S. Hrg. 116-323). The 
Committee ordered S. 526 reported favorably with an amendment 
in the nature of a substitute by voice vote on December 12, 
2019. Senators Barrasso, Risch, and Lee were recorded as voting 
no.
    In the 115th Congress, Senators Heinrich and Udall 
introduced a similar bill, S. 390, on February 15, 2017. No 
further action was taken. Likewise, during the 114th Congress, 
Senators Heinrich and Udall introduced a similar bill, S. 3221, 
on July 14, 2016. No further action was taken.

            COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND TABULATION OF VOTES

    The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 
open business session on May 17, 2023, by a majority vote of a 
quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 534.
    The roll call vote on reporting the measure was 13 yeas, 6 
nays as follows:
        YEAS                          NAYS
Mr. Manchin                         Mr. Barrasso
Mr. Wyden                           Mr. Risch*
Ms. Cantwell                        Mr. Lee*
Mr. Sanders*                        Mr. Cassidy*
Mr. Heinrich                        Mrs. Hyde-Smith
Ms. Hirono                          Mr. Hawley
Mr. King
Ms. Cortez Masto
Mr. Kelly
Mr. Hickenlooper
Mr. Daines
Ms. Murkowski*
Mr. Hoeven*

    *Indicates vote by proxy

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 provides the short title, the ``Buffalo Tract 
Protection Act.''

Section 2. Withdrawal

    Subsection (a) withdraws the Federal land described in 
subsection (b) from location, entry, and patent under the 
mining laws and from disposition under the mineral leasing, 
mineral materials, and geothermal leasing laws.
    Subsection (b) describes the Federal lands to be withdrawn, 
as generally depicted on the referenced map.
    Subsection (c) clarifies that nothing in this section 
prohibits the Secretary of the Interior from conveying the 
surface estate of the Federal land described in subsection (b) 
in accordance with the Federal Land Policy Management Act (43 
U.S.C. 1071 et seq.) or the Recreation and Public Purposes Act 
(43 U.S.C. 869 et seq.), subject to the reservation of the 
mineral estate.

                   COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

    The Committee has requested, but has not yet received, the 
Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the cost of S. 534 as 
ordered reported. When the Congressional Budget Office 
completes its cost estimate, it will be posted on the Internet 
at www.cbo.gov.
    The CBO cost estimate for S. 180 in the 117th Congress 
follows:




    The bill would
       Withdraw roughly 4,300 acres of federal land in 
New Mexico from hardrock mining, mineral and geothermal 
leasing, and disposal under mineral materials laws, subject to 
valid existing rights
    Estimated budgetary effects would mainly stem from
       Forgone government income resulting from the 
withdrawal
    Areas of significant uncertainty include
       Estimating the amount of income forgone under 
the bill
    Bill summary: S. 180 would withdraw roughly 4,300 acres of 
federal land in New Mexico from hardrock mining, mineral and 
geothermal leasing, and disposal under mineral materials laws, 
subject to valid existing rights. That is, the bill would not 
allow new mineral extraction from that land, which is managed 
by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
    Estimated Federal cost: The costs of the legislation fall 
primarily within budget function 300 (natural resources and 
environment).
    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that the 
legislation will be enacted in 2022.
    Background: Businesses interested in extracting materials, 
including sand, gravel, crushed rock, and other materials 
typically used in construction, from BLM land can execute 
contracts with the agency for disposal of those materials. 
Under those contracts, operators pay BLM the in-place value, a 
royalty equal to the value of the material in the ground before 
it is extracted, as determined by an analysis of its fair 
market value. Those payments are classified in the budget as 
offsetting receipts, or reductions in direct spending. Counties 
with production receive 5 percent of those amounts. In 2020, 
BLM collected roughly $2 million in gross receipts from mineral 
materials production in New Mexico, mostly from calcium 
production.
    The agency also issues free-use permits to government 
entities and nonprofit organizations for the extraction of 
mineral materials; however, such permits do not generate any 
income to the federal government.
    Direct Spending: Using information from BLM, CBO expects 
that the proposed withdrawal area has high potential for sand 
and gravel extraction and minimal potential, if any, for 
development of all other minerals. According to the agency, the 
affected land contains an estimated 36 million cubic yards of 
sand and gravel. Based on the typical timeframe for processing 
expressions of interest and contracts for extraction, we expect 
that production of those materials could commence in 2026.
    In recent years, production under sand and gravel contracts 
on BLM land in New Mexico has averaged 280,000 cubic yards 
annually.\1\ CBO estimates that annual production in the 
proposed withdrawal area will equal roughly that amount. Using 
information from BLM and based on the in-place values for sand 
and gravel in recent years, we estimate that the federal 
government will collect, on average, between $1.50 and $1.60 
per cubic yard in royalties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\See Bureau of Land Management, Public Land Statistics (issues 
2016 to 2020), accessed December 21, 2021, https://www.blm.gov/about/
data/public-land-statistics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    However, CBO has no basis to estimate whether BLM will 
execute contracts for materials extraction on the affected 
land. In the absence of specific information, CBO uses a 50 
percent probability that such contracts will be executed under 
current law. On that basis, and accounting for payments to 
counties of 5 percent, we estimate that net federal receipts 
from sand and gravel production in the proposed withdrawal area 
will total $1 million over the 2022-2031 period. Under the 
bill, the federal government would forgo those receipts. Thus, 
CBO estimates that enacting S. 180 would increase direct 
spending by $1 million over the 2022-2031 period.
    Spending subject to appropriation: Based on the costs of 
similar activities, CBO estimates that any administrative costs 
incurred by BLM to implement the withdrawal would be 
insignificant; any spending would be subject to the 
availability of appropriated funds.
    Uncertainty: The amount that the government will collect 
under mineral materials contracts in the proposed withdrawal 
area--and thus the amount of forgone income under the bill--is 
uncertain and could be higher or lower than CBO estimates. 
Specifically, CBO cannot predict whether or when BLM will 
execute such contracts. CBO also cannot foresee the volume or 
value of sand and gravel production on the affected land.
    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 1.

TABLE 1.--CBO'S ESTIMATE OF THE STATUTORY PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS OF S. 180, THE BUFFALO TRACT PROTECTION ACT, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE SENATE COMMITTEE
                                                  ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES ON NOVEMBER 18, 2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    By fiscal year, millions of dollars--
                                                   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     2022    2023    2024    2025    2026    2027    2028    2029    2030    2031   2022-2026  2022-2031
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Net Increase in the Deficit
 
Pay-As-You-Go Effect..............................       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0       0         0          1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Increase in long-term deficits: CBO estimates that enacting 
S. 180 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: Stephen Rabent; Principal Analyst, 
Natural and Physical Resources Cost Estimates Unit. H. Samuel 
Papenfuss; Deputy Director of Budget Analysis.

                      REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION

    In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following 
evaluation of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in 
carrying out S. 534. The bill is not a regulatory measure in 
the sense of imposing Government-established standards or 
significant economic responsibilities on private individuals 
and businesses. No personal information would be collected in 
administering the program. Therefore, there would be no impact 
on personal privacy. Little, if any, additional paperwork would 
result from the enactment of S. 534, as ordered reported.

                   CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

    S. 534, as ordered reported, does not contain any 
congressionally directed spending items, limited tax benefits, 
or limited tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate.

                        EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

    The testimony provided by the Department of the Interior at 
the October 19, 2021, hearing on S. 180 in the 117th Congress 
follows:

Statement of Steve Feldgus, Ph.D., Deputy Assistant Secretary, Land and 
          Minerals Management, U.S. Department of the Interior

    Thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 180, the 
Buffalo Tract Protection Act. The bill would withdraw about 
4,200 acres contained in four parcels of public land managed by 
the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) near Placitas, New Mexico, 
from location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and 
disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and geothermal 
leasing or mineral materials. S. 180 aligns with the 
Administration's conservation goals, and the BLM supports the 
bill.
Background
    The lands proposed for withdrawal are located in close 
proximity to Placitas, New Mexico, which is an unincorporated 
area of Sandoval County, just north of Albuquerque. The 
population of the region has grown significantly in recent 
years, raising community concerns about the potential impacts 
of additional gravel mining in the area. The area is used for a 
variety of recreation activities.
    S. 180 identifies the four parcels for withdrawal as tracts 
A (3,127 acres), B (903 acres), C (201 acres), and D (57 
acres). Tract A is referred to as the ``Buffalo Tract'' and is 
used for hiking, off-highway vehicles (OHVs), and recreational 
shooting. The Buffalo Tract contains sand and gravel ridges and 
arroyos with juniper trees, shrubs, and grasses. Approximately 
25 percent of tract A has been mined and reclaimed to date. 
Tract B is known as the ``Crest of Montezuma'' and is 
characterized by moderately steep slopes with pinyon and 
juniper trees intermixed with shrubs and sparse grasses. Tract 
C, which does not have a specific name, is similar in 
topography to the Buffalo Tract and is a common hiking area for 
local community members. Tract D, referred to as ``San 
Francisco,'' is named after the arroyo that runs through it, 
and has terrain similar to that of the Buffalo Tract.
S. 180, Buffalo Tract Protection Act
    S. 180, the Buffalo Tract Protection Act, would, subject to 
valid existing rights, withdraw four tracts totaling 
approximately 4,200 acres of Federal mineral estate near 
Placitas, New Mexico, from all forms of mineral development 
under all laws pertaining to locatable minerals, mineral 
leasing, or mineral materials. The bill specifies that nothing 
in the act would prevent future conveyance of the surface of 
the withdrawn lands, although the mineral estate would be 
retained by the Federal government.
    The BLM recognizes the importance of locally crafted 
recreation and conservation areas on public lands and waters 
and believes they can yield immense economic benefits. The BLM 
believes the most effective and enduring conservation 
strategies are those reflecting the priorities, needs, and 
perspectives of the families and communities that know, live, 
work, and care for the lands and waters. The BLM is aware that 
local communities, including a Pueblo and residents from 
Placitas and unincorporated Sandoval County, support protection 
of these tracts from future mineral development. The BLM is in 
the process of updating the Rio Puerco Proposed Resource 
Management Plan that has jurisdiction over these covered lands, 
and is committed to ensuring Native American and Hispanic 
community voices are represented in the process.
Conclusion
    The BLM appreciates the efforts of the sponsor and the 
Subcommittee in advancing this important conservation 
initiative. Thank you again for the opportunity to provide 
testimony in support of S. 180.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no 
changes in existing law are made by S.534 as ordered reported.

                                  [all]