69–010 

Calendar No. 119 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 115–92 

ELKHORN RANCH AND WHITE RIVER NATIONAL FOREST 

CONVEYANCE ACT 

JUNE 7, 2017.—Ordered to be printed 

Ms. MURKOWSKI, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 286] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 286) to require a land conveyance involving the 

Elkhorn Ranch and the White River National Forest in the State 

of Colorado, and for other purposes, having considered the same, 

reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends 

that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 286 is to require a land conveyance by the Secretary of Agriculture involving the Elkhorn Ranch and the White 

River National Forest in the State of Colorado. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

Beginning in 1908, three families homesteaded near present-day 

Rifle, Colorado, and for decades legally owned portions of the 148 

acres identified in this bill. Shortly before the acreage was originally patented into private ownership, the General Land Office 

placed the homesteads in Section 18 with east-west fence lines, 

which conform to the present-day fence lines. In 1949, a new government survey was completed for the area that placed the boundary line at an angle rather than on a true east-west line. This resurvey led to the inclusion of 148 acres in the White River National 

Forest rather than in private ownership. The landowners were 

never contacted concerning the resurvey and were unaware that 

2 

their title to the land had been called into question. Since that 

time, the property, commonly called ‘‘Elkhorn Ranch’’ has changed 

hands several times, most recently in 1998 when the GordmanLeverich Partnership purchased the ranch. 

In 2002, the boundary and title discrepancy came to light. The 

Surveyor of the White River National Forest began to examine the 

conflicting surveys and issued a report in 2014, ‘‘Short Summary 

of Boundary Status—Beaver Creek; Sections 18 and 19, T. 7 S. R. 

93 W., 6th PM.,’’ confirming that the original patents were based 

on a proper survey. The report recommended a legislative boundary 

adjustment to correct the survey discrepancy and return the acreage to the private landowner. 

The Bureau of Land Management issued Federal oil and gas 

lease COC–75070 in 2011. This lease includes part of Elkhorn 

Ranch. S. 286 recognizes the lease as a valid existing right and reserves to the United States the right to collect rent and royalty 

payments from this lease. 

Since 1909, the law has guaranteed that resurveys are not to 

‘‘impair the bona fide rights or claims of any claimant, entryman, 

or owner of lands affected by such resurvey or retracement’’ (43 

U.S.C. 772). The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) has never managed 

the 148-acre parcel as national forest system land. For decades, the 

landowners have paid property taxes on the land, made improvements to it, and used it for agricultural and ranching purposes. 

The parcel is currently fenced as part of the ranch and is occupied 

by stock ponds, roads, and other improvements. 

By transferring the 148-acre parcel to Gordman-Leverich Partnership, S. 286 would correct a long-standing survey discrepancy 

and provide a free and clear title to the land subject to valid, existing rights, including the existing Federal oil and gas lease. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Senators Gardner and Bennet introduced S. 286 on February 2, 

2017. 

An identical bill, H.R. 698, was introduced by Representative 

Tipton on January 24, 2017. H.R. 698 passed the House of Representatives by voice vote on February 6, 2017, and was referred 

to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on February 7, 2017. 

In the 114th Congress, similar legislation, H.R. 1554, was introduced in the House of Representatives by Representatives Tipton 

and Polis on March 23, 2015. On June 16, 2015, the House Natural 

Resources Subcommittee on Federal Lands held a hearing on H.R. 

1554, and the Natural Resources Committee ordered the bill reported on July 9, 2015 (H. Rept. 114–251). The House of Representatives passed H.R. 1554 by a voice vote on September 16, 2015. 

In the Senate, an identical companion bill, S. 1942, was introduced by Senator Gardner on August 5, 2015. Senator Bennet was 

a cosponsor. The Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining held a hearing on S. 1942 and H.R. 1554 on October 8, 2015. 

On November 19, 2015, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources met in open business session and ordered both S. 1942 and 

H.R. 1554 favorably reported without amendment (S. Rept. 114– 

195). 

3 

The measure was included in Amendment 3234, which the Senate agreed to on April 19, 2016, as an amendment to S. 2012, the 

Energy Policy Modernization Act of 2016, which the Senate passed, 

as amended, on April 20, 2016. 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources met in open 

business session on March 30, 2017, and ordered S. 286 and H.R. 

698 favorably reported. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 

open business session on March 30, 2017, by a majority voice vote 

of a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 286. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 contains the short title, ‘‘Elkhorn Ranch and White 

River National Forest Conveyance Act.’’ 

Section 2 (a) conveys approximately 148 acres of Federal land to 

the Gordman-Leverich Partnership. 

Subsection (b) subjects the conveyance to valid existing rights, 

including oil and gas lease COC–75070, and reserves for the United 

States the right to collect rent and royalty payments on existing oil 

and gas leases. 

Subsection (c) makes clear that the conveyance does not modify 

the existing boundaries of the White River National Forest or Sections 18 and 19 of Township 7 South. 

Subsection (d) specifies that the conveyance should be completed 

within 180 days following enactment of the Act, and that all costs 

related to surveying, platting, or other activities to process the conveyance shall be paid by the Gordman-Leverich Partnership. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office: 

Elkhorn Ranch and White River National Forest Conveyance Act 

S. 286 would require the Forest Service to convey 148 acres of 

federal lands in Colorado to a private entity. Under the legislation, 

the federal government would retain the right to collect rent and 

royalty payments from an existing oil and gas lease on those lands; 

however, if that lease expires, the Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM) would not be allowed to offer the parcel for lease. Because 

CBO expects that enacting the legislation could reduce offsetting 

receipts, which are treated as reductions in direct spending, from 

bonus bids over the next 10 years, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. 

However, we estimate that net bonus bids from the affected parcel 

would total less than $500,000 over that period. Enacting S. 286 

would not affect revenues. 

CBO estimates that enacting the legislation would not increase 

net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2028. 

In 2012, BLM issued a federal oil and gas lease on a portion of 

the affected lands. If the firm holding that lease takes certain steps 

to begin producing oil and gas before the lease is set to expire in 

2022, the firm would retain the lease until production ended. 

4 

Under current law and under the legislation, the federal government would collect rent and any royalties generated from oil and 

gas produced on that lease, and 49 percent of those proceeds would 

be paid to the state of Colorado. In that case, enacting S. 286 would 

have no effect on direct spending. 

If the lease expires in 2022, BLM could offer the parcel for lease 

after that date under current law. However, the agency could not 

offer the affected parcel for lease under the legislation. Because 

CBO has no basis for determining how the relevant parties would 

respond if the lease were allowed to expire, our estimate reflects 

a point within a range of possible outcomes. Based on the amount 

paid for the lease in 2012 ($335,000), CBO estimates that enacting 

S. 286 would reduce receipts by less than $500,000 over the 2022– 

2027 period. 

S. 286 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates 

as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

On April 7, 2017, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 698, 

the Elkhorn Ranch and White River National Forest Conveyance 

Act of 2017, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on March 30, 2017. S. 286 and H.R. 

698 are similar and CBO’s cost estimate for each piece of legislation is the same. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jeff LaFave. The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant Director for 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. 286. 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. 286, as ordered reported. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

S. 286, 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

Because S. 286 is similar to legislation considered by the Committee in the 114th Congress, the Committee did not request Executive Agency views. The testimony provided by the USFS at the 

hearing before the Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and 

Mining on October 8, 2015, follows: 

5 

STATEMENT OF GLENN CASAMASSA, ASSOCIATE DEPUTY

CHIEF, NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM, U.S. FOREST SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, BEFORE THE UNITED

STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL

RESOURCES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS, FORESTS

AND MINING

Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to present the views of the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture (USDA) regarding S. 1295, S. 

1448, S. 1941, and S. 1942. 

S. 1942, THE ‘‘ELKHORN RANCH AND WHITE RIVER NATIONAL

FOREST CONVEYANCE ACT LAND EXCHANGE ACT OF 2015’’ 

S. 1942 would direct the conveyance of a 148 acre parcel 

of National Forest System land to the Gordman-Leverich 

Partnership. The parcel is located within the White River 

National Forest. 

While the Administration has serious reservations about 

the use of Federal lands to compensate a private landowner, acknowledging the unusual circumstances in this 

specific case, the Department does not oppose S. 1942. The 

bill would resolve a long standing title issue associated 

with the property. 

A dependent resurvey, which is a survey dependent 

upon prior surveys of record, was completed in 1949, and 

established a property monument approximately 2,100 feet 

from the corner, relied upon by the original homesteaders. 

This meant that this parcel of national forest land had 

been managed as private land. 43 U.S.C. 772, enacted in 

1909, provided for such resurveys and guaranteed that the 

bona fide rights of landowners would be protected. 

Because this land survey discrepancy only came to light 

within the past 15 years, and because the parcel has never 

been managed as National Forest, protection of the bona 

fide rights of the landowners is appropriate. Resolution of 

this title issue will end a long-standing title claim in an 

efficient, fair manner. 

This concludes my remarks. I would be happy to answer 

any questions. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. 

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 the bill as ordered reported. 

Æ