39–006

105TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 105–35

RELEASE OF THE REVERSIONARY INTEREST—IOSCO

COUNTY, MICHIGAN

MARCH 20, 1997.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State

of the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. SMITH of Oregon, from the Committee on Agriculture,

submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H.R. 394]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Agriculture, to whom was referred the bill

(H.R. 394) to provide for the release of the reversionary interest

held by the United States in certain property located in the County

of Iosco, Micigan, having considered the same, report favorably

thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

BRIEF EXPLANATION

H.R. 394 provides for the release of a reversionary interest held

by the United States in 1.92 acres in real property in Iosco County,

Michigan, in exchange for adequate consideration.

PURPOSE AND NEED

H.R. 394 is intended to clear title on 1.92 acres in real property

in order to facilitate a land exchange under the Small Tracts Act

of 1983, P.L. 97–465, (16 U.S.C. § 521c et. seq.). The 1.92 acres in

real property was provided to Iosco County for an airport, but a reversionary interest was retained by the United States in the event

the property was ever used for another purpose. Because of a survey error, the property has been in private use. The private party

has agreed to provide real property of equal value to Iosco County

in exchange for the 1.92 acres. A release of the reversionary interest held by the United States is necessary to carry out the exchange. The U.S. Forest Service may seek to acquire a reversionary

interest in another piece of property owned by Iosco County in ex-
2

change for such release (See Congressional Budget Office letter

dated March 13, 1997.)

SECTION-BY-SECTION

Section 1 requires the Secretary to release the reversionary interest of the United States in the 1.92 acres. Section 1 further provides a description of the property, leave for the Secretary to require additional terms in connection with the release to protect the

interests of the United States, and a provision requiring the Secretary to execute and file necessary documents to effectuate the release.

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

The Committee on Agriculture met, pursuant to notice and with

a quorum present, on March 12, 1997, to consider H.R. 394. Chairman Smith recognized Mr. Combest, Chairman of the Subcommittee, who requested the Subcommittee on Forestry, Resource Conservation, and Research be discharged from further consideration

of H.R. 394, and other legislation. Mr. Combest provided an explanation of H.R. 394, and there was no discussion or other comments.

Mr. Combest moved that the bill be adopted and favorably reported

to the House, and the motion was agreed to by a voice vote.

The Committee then proceeded to other items of business.

REPORTING THE BILL—ROLLCALL VOTES

In compliance with clause 2(l)(2) of rule XI of the House of Representatives, H.R. 394 was reported by voice vote with a majority

quorum present. There was no request for a recorded vote.

ADMINISTRATION POSITION

Because H.R. 394 was identical to a bill, H.R. 2670, introduced

by Mr. Barcia in the 104th Congress, reported to the House with

an amendment on June 19, 1996, and adopted in the House on August 1, 1996, the Committee did not ask for a report from the Department of Agriculture on the bill. When H.R. 2670 was considered during a Subcommittee business meeting on May 30, 1996,

the Department of Agriculture recommended enactment of H.R.

2670 if amended to provide for appropriate consideration for the release of the reversionary interest. Such an amendment was offered

and approved during that business meeting.

BUDGET ACT COMPLIANCE (SECTIONS 308, 403 AND 424)

The provisions of clause 2(l)(3)(B) of rule XI of the Rules of the

House of Representatives and section 308(a)(1) of the Congressional

Budget Act of 1974 (relating to estimates of new budget authority,

new spending authority, new credit authority, or increased or decreased revenues or tax expenditures) are not considered applicable. The estimate and comparison required to be prepared by the

Director of the Congressional Budget Office under clause 2(l)(3)(C)

of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and sections

403 and 424 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 submitted to

the Committee prior to the filing of this report are as follows:
3

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, March 13, 1997.

Hon. BOB SMITH,

Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 394, a bill to provide for

the release of the reversionary interest held by the United States

in certain property located in the County of Iosco, Michigan.

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Victoria V. Heid.

Sincerely,

JUNE E. O’NEILL, Director.

Enclosure.

H.R. 394—A bill to provide for the release of the reversionary interest held by the United States in certain property located in the

County of Iosco, Michigan

H.R. 394 would release the reversionary interest in 1.92 acres of

property that the United States retained when it conveyed the

property to Iosco County, Michigan, in 1960. The bill would allow

the Secretary of Agriculture to require such terms or conditions in

connection with the release as he considers appropriate to protect

the interests of the United States. CBO estimates that enacting

this bill would have no significant effect on the federal budget.

According to the U.S. Forest Service, the agency may seek to

gain the reversionary interest in another piece of property owned

by Iosco County in exchange for release of the reversionary interest

specified in this bill. Based on information from the Forest Service,

CBO estimates that the administrative costs to process this exchange would be negligible.

Because the bill would not affect direct spending or receipts, payas-you-go procedures would not apply to the bill. H.R. 394 contains

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 and would impose no costs

on state, local, or tribal governments.

The CBO staff contact for the estimate is Victoria V. Heid. This

estimate was approved by Paul N. Van de Water, Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause 2(l)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the House

of Representatives, the Committee finds the Constitutional authority for this legislation in Article I, clause 8, section 18, that grants

Congress the power to make all laws necessary and proper for carrying out the powers vested by Congress in the Government of the

United States or in any department or officer thereof.

OVERSIGHT STATEMENT

No summary of oversight findings and recommendations made by

the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight as provided

for in clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI, and under clause 4(c)(2) of rule
4

X of the Rules of the House of Representatives was available to the

Committee with reference to the subject matter specifically addressed by H.R. 394.

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS

Pursuant to clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI and clause 2(b)(1) of rule

X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on

Agriculture’s oversight findings and recommendations are reflected

in the body of this report.

COMMITTEE COST ESTIMATE

Pursuant to clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of

Representatives, the Committee report incorporates the cost estimate prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office

pursuant to sections 403 and 424 of the Congressional Budget Act

of 1974.

ADVISORY COMMITTEE STATEMENT

No advisory committee within the meaning of section 5(b) of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act is created by this legislation.

APPLICABILITY TO THE 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 (Public Law 104–1).

Æ