Katie Hoover
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
The Oregon and California Railroad (O&C) lands consist of 2.6 million
acres of timberland in western Oregon. The majority of these lands (2.5
million acres) were originally granted to the Oregon & California
Railroad Company in 1866 for constructing approximately 300 miles of the Oregon
portion of a railroad from Portland, OR, to Sacramento, CA. However, in 1915
the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the railroad violated the terms of the
grant. The disposition of these lands was eventually resolved with the
O&C Act of 1937, which revested the lands back into federal ownership
to be managed by the Department of the Interior “for permanent forest production”
with the purpose to provide a supply of timber, protect watersheds, provide recreational
opportunities, and contribute to the economic stability of the local
communities. The O&C Act of 1937 established a revenue-sharing system
with the 18 counties in Oregon that contain O&C lands. Currently at
issue for Congress are payments to the counties that contain O&C land,
the sequestration of the FY2012 payment, and the applicability of various land management
and environmental laws.
The O&C lands are managed under the Northwest Forest Plan (NWFP). The NWFP
is a series of federal policies and forest management direction adopted in
the 1990s. The NWFP covers 24 million acres of public land, including 19
national forests managed by the Forest Service and 7 Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) districts in California, Oregon, and Washington. The O&C lands
make up 11% of the NWFP management area by acreage, and 37% of Oregon’s NWFP management
area by acreage.
The revenue sharing system established under the 1937 O&C Act was to
compensate for the loss of property tax revenue when the O&C lands
were revested back to the federal government. When timber sales and
revenues began to decline in the Pacific Northwest in the 1990s, Congress established
alternative compensation systems: first the safety net payments specifically
for the Pacific Northwest, then the broader Secure Rural Schools and
Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (SRS; P.L. 106-393, as amended).
After several reauthorizations and extensions, SRS expired after the
FY2012 payment. Congress again is considering extending SRS. Options include
extending the SRS with or without modifications, reverting back to the revenue-sharing payment
system, or other legislative proposals to address O&C payments.
Legislation has been introduced in the 113th Congress to address the management of the O&C lands and federal
payment programs to the O&C counties. H.R. 1526 would transfer management authority
of much of the O&C lands to a governor-appointed panel and establish a
trust with fiduciary responsibility to the counties, among other
provisions related to the management and applicability of federal
environmental laws. H.R. 1526 would provide a one-time SRS payment in 2015
based on FY2010 payments. In separate legislation, the Senate-passed version of
H.R. 527 would reauthorize SRS for FY2013 at 95% of the FY2012 payment
level.
This report provides background information about the O&C lands and
discusses federal payments made to the 18 counties in Oregon. This report
then discusses some of the major issues before Congress related to the
management of the O&C lands.
Date of Report: September 23, 2013
Number of Pages: 17
Order Number: R42951
Price: $29.95
To Order:
R42951 .pdf
to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART
e-mail congress@pennyhill.com
Phone
301-253-0881
For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card
number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail
or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Katie Hoover
Analyst in Natural Resources Policy
Many counties are compensated for the tax-exempt status of federal lands.
Counties with national forest lands and with certain Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) lands have historically received a percentage of agency
revenues, primarily from timber sales. However, timber sales have declined
substantially—by more than 90% in some areas. Thus, Congress enacted
the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000
(SRS; P.L. 106-393) as a temporary, optional program of payments based on
historic, rather than current, revenues.
Authorization for SRS payments originally expired at the end of FY2006, but
through several reauthorizations the program was extended through FY2012.
Congressional debates over reauthorization considered the basis and level
of compensation (historical, tax equivalency, etc.); the source of funds
(receipts, a new tax or revenue source, etc.); the authorized and required uses of
the payments; interaction with other compensation programs (notably Payments in
Lieu of Taxes); and the duration of any changes (temporary or permanent).
In addition, legislation with mandatory spending, such as SRS
reauthorization, raises policy questions about increasing the deficit;
current budget rules to restrain deficit spending typically impose a procedural
barrier to such legislation, generally requiring offsets by additional
receipts or reductions in other mandatory spending.
In 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (P.L. 110-343) enacted a
four-year extension to SRS authorization through FY2011, with declining
payments, a modified formula, and transition payments for certain areas.
In 2012, Congress enacted a one-year extension through FY2012, and amended
the program by slowing the decline in payment levels and
tightening requirements that counties select a payment option promptly
(P.L. 112-141).
Section 302 of the Budget Control Act (P.L. 112-25, as amended by P.L. 112-240)
requires the President to order a sequester, or cancellation, of budgetary
resources for FY2013. The sequester order took effect on March 1, 2013,
and affected the SRS payment for FY2012, although BLM and Forest Service
implemented the order differently from each other.
With the expiration of SRS at the end of FY2012, county compensation is again
the subject of congressional debates. County payments are set to return to
a revenue-based system for FY2013, and are likely to be significantly
lower than the previous years’ payments. However, payments for FY2013 have
not yet been made, and Congress may consider extending SRS (with or
without modifications and with or without addressing the sequester order),
implementing other legislative proposals to address the county payments,
or taking no action. No action would continue the revenue-based system
that took effect upon the program’s expiration. Discussion in the 113th Congress has focused on
many of the same issues that were debated in 2006-2008 and again in 2012.
On September 19, 2013, the Senate passed H.R. 527, the Responsible
Helium Administration and Stewardship Act of 2013. The Senate version
would reauthorize SRS for FY2013. On September 20, 2013, the House passed
H.R. 1526, the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act,
which would provide a one-time SRS payment in 2015.
Date of Report: September 23, 2013
Number of Pages: 23
Order Number: R41303
Price: $29.95
To Order:
R41303 .pdf
to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART
e-mail congress@pennyhill.com
Phone
301-253-0881
For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card
number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail
or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Pervaze A. Sheikh and
Charles V. Stern
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Amanda Marie Levin
Research Associate
The Salton Sea is located in southern California and is considered the largest
inland water body in the state. The Salton Basin, where the Salton Sea is
located, has supported many lakes and water bodies throughout its
geological history. The Salton Sea was created when a canal gate broke in 1905
allowing fresh Colorado River water into the Basin. The Salton Sea is now
sustained by agricultural runoff from farmlands in the Imperial and
Coachella valleys. It provides permanent and temporary habitat for many
species of plants and animals, including several endangered species. It
also serves as an important recreational area for the region. The Salton Sea
has been altered by increasing salinity and decreasing size caused by
steadily decreasing water flows into the Sea. High salinity levels and
shrinking area have been linked to habitat changes and stressed populations
of plants and animals, economic losses in the region, and impaired air quality.
Efforts to restore the Salton Sea ecosystem have been discussed and initiated
through state and federal actions. Several studies by state and federal
agencies have provided baseline data about the Sea, and some restoration
plans have been proposed. The State of California, the Salton Sea Authority,
and the federal government through the Bureau of Reclamation have devised plans
for restoring the Sea. However, none of these plans are being fully
implemented. Federal authorities that address restoration of the Salton
Sea are generally based on creating and evaluating proposals for
restoration, rather than implementing restoration activities in a comprehensive
manner similar to other initiatives in the Everglades and Great Lakes.
California is pursuing restoration options, but funding for implementing
them is lacking.
Whether or not to restore the Salton Sea remains controversial. Proponents of
restoration contend that the Salton Sea ecosystem is valuable from an
ecological standpoint because it is one of the few remaining large-scale
wetland habitats in California for migratory birds and fish. Further, some
argue that keeping the Salton Sea intact will stimulate economic development,
recreation, and tourism in the region. They note that losing the Sea could
cause economic and environmental decline, and could lead to air quality
problems from exposed seabeds. Others contend that the Sea should not be
restored. They argue that the Salton Sea is naturally declining, as it has
throughout its geological history. Further, they note that countering this
process will be costly and ultimately not worth the expense. They state
that limited restoration funds should be used to restore other natural
wetlands in California, such as the Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay Delta.
The decline of the Salton Sea ecosystem is accelerating due to water transfers
from agricultural lands to municipal water districts in San Diego under
the terms of the Quantification Settlement Agreement, an agreement on how
to share California’s apportionment of Colorado River water. The water
transfers have resulted in less water flowing into the Salton Sea and
accelerated increases in salinity and shoreline recession. According to
some scientists, salinity levels may reach lethal levels for most fish and
wildlife as soon as 2018. These predictions, along with the steadily
declining ecosystem might provoke Congress to consider a larger role in
restoration for the federal government. Congress may decide to address
restoration by increasing the federal role in restoration efforts. This
could be done by funding existing federal authorities that address, or could
address, restoring the ecosystem; authorizing federal participation and
appropriations for implementing existing restoration plans; or authorizing
a new comprehensive plan to be created that might involve participation
from federal and non-federal stakeholders, similar to other restoration
initiatives around the country. Congress might also decide not to address
restoration of the Salton Sea ecosystem, or simply maintain the status quo
of federal participation.
Date of Report: September 24, 2013
Number of Pages: 31
Order Number: R43211
Price: $29.95
To Order:
R43211.pdf
to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART
e-mail congress@pennyhill.com
Phone
301-253-0881
For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card
number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail
or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
Nicole T. Carter
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Charles V. Stern
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers undertakes activities to maintain navigable
channels, reduce flood and storm damage, and restore aquatic ecosystems.
Congress directs the Corps through authorizations, appropriations, and
oversight of its studies, construction projects, and other activities.
This report summarizes congressional authorization and appropriations processes
for the Corps. It also discusses agency activities under general
authorities.
Omnibus Authorization Legislation. Congress generally authorizes numerous
Corps activities and provides policy direction in an omnibus Corps
authorization bill, typically called the Water Resources Development Act
(WRDA). The most recent WRDA was enacted in 2007 (P.L. 110- 114). WRDAs
historically have been omnibus bills including many provisions for site-specific activities.
How to construct a WRDA bill that complied with House rules related to a
moratorium on earmarks complicated WRDA consideration in the 112th Congress. The House
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is set to consider its omnibus
Corps authorization and policy bill, H.R. 3080, the Water Resources Reform
and Development Act (WRRDA), in September 2013.
The Senate passed WRDA 2013, S. 601, on May 15, 2013. S. 601 would authorize
Corps activities and modifications of existing authorizations that meet
certain criteria; the bill includes numerous other provisions as it
attempts to address issues with the duration and cost of Corps projects.
The bill also would establish new procedures for using Harbor Maintenance Trust
Fund monies, in an effort to expand spending above current levels.
Agency Appropriations. Federal funding for Corps civil works activities is
provided in annual Energy and Water Development appropriations acts or
supplemental appropriations acts. Annual Corps civil works appropriations
have ranged from $4.5 billion to $5.5 billion in the last decade. An
increasing share of the agency’s appropriations is used for operations and
maintenance. Another trend has been increasing emergency supplemental
appropriations. From 1987 to 2013, Congress appropriated $32.2 billion in
Corps supplemental funding. Of this funding, $30.8 billion came through
acts passed between 2003 and 2013. This funding was more than half of the Corps’ regular
appropriations from 2003 through 2013 ($55 billion). In part because of
competition for funds and because Corps authorizations outpace
appropriations, many authorized activities have not received
appropriations. There is a backlog of more than 1,000 authorized studies and construction
projects. In recent years, few new studies and new construction activities have
been in either the President’s budget request or enacted appropriations.
Standard Project Development. The standard process for a Corps project
requires two separate congressional authorizations—one for investigation
and one for construction—as well as appropriations. The investigation
phase starts with Congress authorizing a study; if it is funded, the Corps
conducts an initial reconnaissance study followed by a more detailed
feasibility study. Congressional authorization for construction is based
on the feasibility study. For most activities, Congress requires a
nonfederal sponsor to share some portion of study and construction costs. These
cost-sharing requirements vary by the type of project. For many project types
(e.g., levees), nonfederal sponsors are responsible for operation and
maintenance once construction is complete.
Other Corps Activities and Authorities. Although the project development
process just described is standard, there are exceptions. Congress has
granted the Corps some general authorities to undertake some studies,
small projects, technical assistance, and emergency actions such as
flood-fighting and repair of damaged levees. Additionally, the Corps conducts
emergency response actions directed by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
Date of Report: September 11, 2013
Number of Pages: 24
Order Number: R41243
Price: $29.95
To Order:
R41243.pdf
to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART
e-mail congress@pennyhill.com
Phone
301-253-0881
For email and phone orders, provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card
number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail
or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.
R42951 .pdf
to use the SECURE SHOPPING CART
Posts
