```

[Senate Report 111-260]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                       Calendar No. 530
111th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     111-260

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

 
               FEDERAL LAND TRANSACTION FACILITATION ACT

                                _______
                                

                 August 5, 2010.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 1787]

    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 
referred the bill (S. 1787) to reauthorize the Federal Land 
Transaction Facilitation Act, and for other purposes, having 
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with amendments 
and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.
    The amendments are as follows:
    1. On page 2, strike line 9 and insert the following:
                  (B) in subsection (d), by striking ``10'' and 
                inserting ``20'';
    2. On page 2, strike lines 13 and 14 and insert the 
following:
                  (A) in paragraph (1)--
                          (i) by striking ``96-568'' and 
                        inserting ``96-586''; and
                          (ii) by striking ``; or'' and 
                        inserting a semicolon;
    3. On page 2, line 23, strike ``or''.
    4. On page 3, strike line 3 and insert the following: 108-
424; 118 Stat. 2403);
          ``(5) subtitle F of title I of the Omnibus Public 
        Land Management Act of 2009 (16 U.S.C. 1132 note; 
        Public Law 111-11);
          ``(6) subtitle O of title I of the Omnibus Public 
        Land Management Act of 2009 (16 U.S.C. 460www note, 
        1132 note; Public Law 111-11);
          ``(7) section 2601 of the Omnibus Public Land 
        Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 
        1108); or
           ``(8) section 2606 of the Omnibus Public Land 
        Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 
        1121).''.

                                Purpose

    The purpose of S. 1787, as ordered reported, is to 
reauthorize the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act for 
an additional 10-year period.

                          Background and Need

    In July of 2000, Congress enacted the Federal Land 
Transaction and Facilitation Act (FLTFA) as Title II of the 
Valles Caldera Preservation Act (Public Law 106-248). FLTFA 
authorizes the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to sell public 
lands identified for disposal through the land use planning 
process prior to July 2000 and to retain the proceeds from the 
sales in a special account set up in the Treasury, to be 
available without further appropriation. The funds in that 
account are used to buy inholdings within Federally-designated 
areas in the same State, including BLM, National Park Service, 
Fish and Wildlife Service, and Forest Service areas. The 
authorization for FLTFA expires on July 25, 2010.
    Since enactment of FLTFA in 2000, the BLM has used the 
FLTFA authority to sell 309 parcels previously identified for 
disposal, totaling 29,437 acres, with a total value of 
approximately $113.4 million. During the same time period, the 
Federal government has acquired 28 parcels totaling 16,738 
acres, with a total value of approximately $43.8 million. An 
additional 11 parcels, totaling 1,282 acres and valued at 
approximately $23 million, have been approved for acquisition.
    Because FLTFA is scheduled to sunset on July 25, 2010, S. 
1787, as ordered reported, would extend the program's 
authorization to July 25, 2020 and expand the pool of eligible 
lands to be sold to include any lands identified for disposal 
as of the date of enactment of S. 1787. Furthermore, if the law 
is not reauthorized, proceeds from BLM land sales will not be 
available for future acquisitions and instead will be deposited 
into the Treasury.

                          Legislative History

    S. 1787 was introduced by Senator Bingaman on October 14, 
2009. Senator Mark Udall is a cosponsor. The Subcommittee on 
Public Lands and Forests held a hearing on S. 1787 on December 
17, 2009. S. Hrg. 111-364. The Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources considered the bill and adopted amendments at its 
business meeting on June 16, 2010. The Committee ordered S. 
1787 129 favorably reported, as amended, at its business 
meeting on June 21, 2010.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 
open business session on June 21, 2010, by voice vote of a 
quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 1787, if 
amended as described herein.

                          Committee Amendments

    During its consideration of S. 1787, the Committee adopted 
several amendments. Amendment #1 strikes the permanent 
reauthorization of FLTFA, and instead sunsets the program's 
authorization on July 25, 2020. The next two amendments make 
technical and conforming changes. The fourth amendment 
references several sections from the Omnibus Public Land 
Management Act of 2009 (which authorized the sale of certain 
Federal lands) to clarify those lands remain eligible for sale 
under separate laws and that the provisions of FLTFA will not 
apply.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    Section 1 provides the short title, the ``Federal Land 
Transaction Facilitation Act Reauthorization of 2009''.
    Section 2(1) amends section 203(2) of FLTFA (Public Law 
106-248) to make any federally designated area (as defined in 
section 103(o) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 
1976) eligible for FLTFA funds, regardless of when the area was 
established.
    Section 2(2) amends section 205 of FLTFA by allowing any 
Federal lands identified for disposal in approved land use 
plans as of the date of enactment of this Act to be eligible 
for sale under FLTFA. As originally enacted, only lands 
identified for disposal as of July 2000 were eligible for sale 
under FLTFA. The section extends the authorization for FLTFA 
through July 25, 2020.
    Section 2(3) strikes subsection (f) of section 206 of 
FLTFA, which requires the proceeds from BLM land sales to be 
deposited into the Treasury when FLTFA's authorization ends.
    Section 2(4) makes technical and conforming changes to 
section 207(b) of FLTFA, and amends section 207(b) to include 
the White Pine County Conservation, Recreation, and Development 
Act of 2006, the Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, and 
Development Act of 2004, and several subtitles and sections 
from the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 to clarify 
that those lands remain eligible for sale under separate laws 
and that the FLTFA provisions will not apply.

                   Cost and Budgetary Considerations

    The following estimate of costs of this measure has been 
provided by the Congressional Budget Office:

S. 1787--Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act Reauthorization of 
        2009

    Summary: S. 1787 would authorize several federal agencies 
to spend, without further appropriation, proceeds from the sale 
of certain lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management 
(BLM). Based on information from BLM, CBO estimates that 
enacting the legislation would increase direct spending by $8 
million over the 2011-2020 period; therefore, pay-as-you-go 
procedures would apply. Enacting the legislation would not 
affect revenues.
    S. 1787 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The Federal Land 
Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA), which expired in July 
2010, authorized BLM to sell certain federal lands and deposit 
the proceeds from those sales into the Federal Land Disposal 
Account. FLTFA also authorized four land-management agencies 
(BLM, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the National Park 
Service, and the Forest Service) to spend amounts in that 
account, without further appropriation, to purchase inholdings 
(privately held land surrounded by federal land). Upon 
termination of the authorities provided under FLTFA, amounts in 
the Federal Land Disposal Account were deposited into the Land 
and Water Conservation Fund and available for authorized 
purposes subject to appropriation.
    S. 1787 would authorize those four land-management agencies 
to spend, without further appropriation, proceeds from the sale 
of BLM land to purchase inholdings. Because the authority to 
spend amounts in the Federal Land Disposal Account has expired, 
CBO expects that extending the authority would result in new 
direct spending from future sales of BLM land. Under current 
law, proceeds from the sale of BLM lands are deposited in the 
Treasury and are not available to be spent without 
appropriation. Based on historical trends in BLM land sales, 
CBO estimates that enacting the legislation would increase 
direct spending by $8 million over the 2011-2020 period. For 
this estimate, CBO assumes that the legislation will be enacted 
near the end of 2010.
    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. S. 1787 would increase direct spending; therefore, 
pay-as-you-go procedures would apply. The budgetary changes 
that are subject to pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the 
following table.

  CBO ESTIMATE OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO EFFECTS FOR S. 1787, THE FEDERAL LAND TRANSACTION FACILITATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2009, AS ORDERED REPORTED BY THE
                                            SENATE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES ON JUNE 21, 2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       By fiscal year in millions of dollars--
                                                            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                           2010-   2010-
                                                              2010   2011   2012   2013   2014   2015   2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2015    2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (-) IN THE DEFICIT

Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Impact.............................      0      1      1      1      1      1      1      1      1      1      1       4       8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 1787 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or 
tribal governments.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Jeff LaFave; Impact on 
State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Melissa Merrell; Impact 
on the Private Sector: Amy Petz.
    Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, 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. 1787.
    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. 1787, as ordered reported.

                   Congressionally Directed Spending

    S. 1787, 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 Bureau of Land Management at 
the December 17, 2009 Subcommittee hearing on S. 1787 follows:

    Statement of Edwin Roberson, Assistant Director, Bureau of Land 
                 Management, Department of the Interior

    Thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 1787, the 
Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act Reauthorization of 
2009. The Administration strongly supports S. 1787 and 
encourages the Congress to move swiftly to reauthorize the 
Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act (FLTFA). Over the 
past decade, the Department of the Interior has made a number 
of important acquisitions using the FLTFA's provisions. 
Reauthorization of the Act will allow us to continue to use 
this critical tool for enhancing our Nation's treasured 
landscapes.

                               background

    Congress enacted the FLTFA in July of 2000 as Title II of 
Public Law 106-248 (frequently referred to as the ``Baca 
Bill''). As originally enacted, the FLTFA is scheduled to 
sunset on July 24, 2010, just seven months away.
    Under the FLTFA, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) may 
sell public lands, identified for disposal through the land use 
planning process prior to July 2000, and retain the proceeds 
from those sales in a special account in the Treasury. The BLM 
may then use those funds to acquire, from willing sellers, 
inholdings within certain Federally-designated areas and lands 
that are adjacent to those areas that contain exceptional 
resources. Lands may be acquired within and/or adjacent to 
areas managed by the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service (FWS), the U.S. Forest Service (FS), and 
the BLM. To date, approximately 29,400 acres have been sold 
under this authority and approximately 17,000 acres of 
treasured landscapes have been acquired.
    The 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) 
provides clear policy direction to the BLM that public lands 
should generally be retained in public ownership. However, 
section 203 of FLPMA allows the BLM to identify lands as 
potentially available for disposal if they meet one or more of 
the following criteria: fl
           Lands consisting of scattered, isolated 
        tracts that are difficult or uneconomic to manage; or
           Lands that were acquired for a specific 
        purpose and are no longer needed for that purpose; or
           Lands that could serve important public 
        objectives, such as community expansion and economic 
        development, which outweigh other public objectives and 
        values that could be served by retaining the land in 
        Federal ownership.
    The BLM identifies lands that may be suitable for disposal 
through its land use planning process, which involves full 
public participation. The process of identifying these lands 
does not typically include review of other considerations such 
as the presence of threatened or endangered species, cultural 
or historic resources, or encumbrances because these 
considerations are not included in the FLTFA criteria. Before 
the BLM can sell, exchange, or otherwise dispose of these 
lands, however, it must undertake extensive environmental 
impact analyses, clearances, surveys, and appraisals for the 
individual parcels.
    Before the enactment of the FLTFA, the BLM had the 
authority under FLPMA to sell lands identified for disposal. 
The proceeds from those sales were deposited into the General 
Fund of the Treasury. However, because of the costs associated 
with those sales (including environmental and cultural 
clearances, appraisals, and surveys), few sales were 
undertaken. Rather, the BLM relied largely on land exchanges to 
adjust land tenure. This can often be a less efficient process.
    Once the FLTFA was enacted, the BLM developed guidance, 
processes, and tools to complete the FLTFA land sales. Working 
cooperatively, the BLM, NPS, FWS, and FS then developed 
guidance, processes, and tools for subsequent FLTFA land 
acquisitions. The BLM markedly increased sales under the 
program over the last few years. Recent market conditions, 
however, have led to less-robust sales than earlier in the life 
of the program.
    Since it was enacted, the BLM utilized FLTFA to sell 309 
parcels previously identified for disposal totaling 29,437 
acres, with a total value of approximately $113.4 million. Over 
the same time period, the Federal government acquired 28 
parcels totaling 16,738 acres, with a total value of 
approximately $43.8 million using FLTFA authority. An 
additional 11 parcels, totaling 1,282 acres and valued at 
approximately $23 million have been approved for acquisition. 
Work on these acquisitions is proceeding swiftly.
    Some lands identified for disposal and sold through the 
FLTFA process are high-value lands in the urban interface. For 
example, in 2007 the BLM in Arizona sold at auction a 282-acre 
parcel in the suburban Phoenix area for $7 million. However, 
many of the lands the BLM has identified for disposal are 
isolated or scattered parcels in remote areas with relatively 
low value. Frequently, there is limited interest in acquiring 
these lands, and the costs of preparing them for sale may 
exceed their market value.
    Since the inception of the FLTFA, the BLM has deposited 
$108.9 million into the Federal Land Disposal Account. That 
figure represents 96% of the total revenues from these sales. 
Approximately $4.5 million has been transferred to the states 
in which the sales originated, as provided for in individual 
Statehood Acts (typically 4% of the sale price).
    Using the FLTFA proceeds, the BLM, NPS, FWS, and FS have 
acquired significant inholdings and adjacent lands from willing 
sellers, consistent with the provisions of the Act. For 
example, just last month the BLM used FLTFA funds to complete 
the acquisition of 4,573 acres within the BLM's Canyons of the 
Ancients National Monument in southwest Colorado. These 
inholdings encompass 25 documented cultural sites, and 
archaeologists expect to record an additional 700 significant 
finds. The acquisition also included two particularly important 
areas: ``Jackson's Castle,'' which is archeologically 
significant; and the ``Skywatcher Site,'' a one-of-a-kind 1,000 
year old solstice marker. The following are a few additional 
examples of important FLTFA acquisitions:
     Elk Springs Area of Critical Environmental Concern 
(ACEC), New Mexico/BLM--This 2,280-acre acquisition protects 
critical elk wintering habitat.
     Hells Canyon Wilderness, Arizona/BLM--A 640-acre 
parcel constituting the last inholding within the Hells Canyon 
Wilderness, located just 25 miles northwest of Phoenix.
     Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming/NPS--This small 
(1.38 acres), but critical inholding within the Park was 
acquired and protected from development.
     Zion National Park, Utah/NPS--A combination of 
FLTFA and Land and Water Conservation Fund monies were used to 
acquire two 5-acre inholdings that overlook some of the Park's 
outstanding geologic formations. These areas were previously 
targeted for development.
     Nestucca Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Oregon/
FWS--This 92-acre dairy farm on the outskirts of Pacific City, 
Oregon was slated for residential development and was acquired 
to protect a significant portion of the world's population of 
the Semidi Islands Aleutian Cackling Goose.
     Six Rivers National Forest, California/FS--Over 
4,400 acres were acquired within the Goose Creek National Wild 
and Scenic River corridor, preserving 4 miles of the river 
known for dense stands of Douglas fir, redwoods, and Port 
Orford cedar.

                                s. 1787

    S. 1787 would both extend and enhance the original FLTFA 
through four major changes.
    First, the bill eliminates a 10-year sunset provision 
included in the original FLTFA. This change would enable the 
BLM to plan for and implement this program on a long-term 
basis.
    Second, under the original FLTFA, only lands identified for 
disposal prior to July 25, 2000 were eligible to be sold. S. 
1787 modifies that restriction by allowing any lands identified 
for disposal through the BLM's land use planning process by the 
date of enactment of S. 1787 to be sold through the FLTFA 
process. The Department supports this change, which recognizes 
the usefulness and importance of the BLM's land use planning 
process. However, we would recommend eliminating this 
restriction rather than simply moving the date forward.
    The BLM currently oversees the public lands through 172 
Resource Management Plans (RMPs). Since 2000, the BLM has 
completed 67 new RMPs, 18 major amendments to existing RMPs, 
and numerous smaller land use plan amendments. Additionally, 
the BLM is currently involved in planning efforts on 35 new 
RMPs, all of which the agency expects to complete within the 
next three years. Planning updates are an ongoing part of the 
BLM's mandate under FLPMA. In this process, the BLM often makes 
incremental modifications to the plans, and identifies lands 
that may be suitable for disposal. All of these planning 
modifications or revisions are made in compliance with the 
National Environmental Policy Act, and are undertaken through a 
process that invites full public participation.
    Third, the original FLTFA only allows acquisitions of 
inholdings within, or special lands adjacent to Federal units 
that existed prior to July 25, 2000. S. 1787 eliminates this 
limitation as well, and we support this change. In March of 
this year, President Obama signed the Omnibus Public Land 
Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11) into law, which 
designates or expands numerous wilderness areas, wild and 
scenic rivers, national park units, and other units of the 
BLM's National Landscape Conservation System. S. 1787 will 
allow the use of FLTFA funds to acquire inholdings within these 
areas and areas designated by other legislation enacted after 
July 2000.
    Finally, S. 1787 adds exceptions to the FLTFA in 
recognition of specific laws that modify the FLTFA with respect 
to some particular locations. The FLTFA does not apply to lands 
available for sale under the Santini-Burton Act (P.L. 96-586) 
and the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act (P.L. 105-
263). S. 1787 additionally exempts lands included in the White 
Pine County Conservation, Recreation, and Development Act (P.L. 
109-432) and the Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation and 
Development Act (P.L. 108-424).
    However, we note that S. 1787 does not account for some 
provisions of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 
that modify the application of FLTFA at specific sites or for 
specific purposes. The portions of the Omnibus Public Land 
Management Act of 2009 that contain language regarding the 
applicability of the FLTFA include:
           Owyhee Public Land Management (Title I, 
        Subtitle F);
           Washington County, Utah (Title I, Subtitle 
        O);
           Carson City, Nevada, land conveyances (Title 
        II, Subtitle G, section 2601); and
           Douglas County, Washington, land conveyance 
        (Title II, Subtitle G, section 2606).
    We are happy to work with the Committee, as appropriate, to 
address these special provisions.

                               conclusion

    Thank you for the opportunity to testify in strong support 
of S. 1787, the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act 
Reauthorization of 2009. By extending the FLTFA, the Congress 
will allow the BLM to continue a rational process of land 
disposal that is anchored in public participation and sound 
land use planning, while providing for land acquisitions to 
augment and strengthen our Nation's treasured landscapes.

                        Changes in Existing Law

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by 
the bill S. 1787, as ordered reported, are shown as follows 
(existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black 
brackets, new matter is printed in italic, existing law in 
which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

VALLES CALDERA PRESERVATION ACT; FEDERAL LAND TRANSACTION FACILITATION 
                                  ACT

              (Public Law 106-248; Approved July 25, 2000)

 AN ACT To authorize the acquisition of the Valles Caldera, to provide 
for an effective land and wildlife management program for this resource 
     within the Department of Agriculture, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

TITLE II--FEDERAL LAND TRANSACTION FACILITATION

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 203. DEFINITIONS.

    In this title:
    (1) Exceptional resource.--The term ``exceptional 
resource'' means a resource of scientific, natural, historic, 
cultural, or recreational value that has been documented by a 
Federal, State, or local governmental authority, and for which 
there is a compelling need for conservation and protection 
under the jurisdiction of a Federal agency in order to maintain 
the resource for the benefit of the public.
    (2) Federally designated area.--The term ``federally 
designated area'' means land in Alaska and the eleven 
contiguous Western States (as defined in section 103(o) of the 
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 
1702(o)) that [on the date of enactment of this Act was] is 
within the boundary of--

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

SEC. 205. DISPOSAL OF PUBLIC LAND.

    (a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish a program, 
using funds made available under section 206, to complete 
appraisals and satisfy other legal requirements for the sale or 
exchange of public land identified for disposal under approved 
land use plans (as in effect on the date of enactment of [this 
Act] the Federal Land Transaction Facilitation Act 
Reauthorization of 2009) under section 202 of the Federal Land 
Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    (d) Termination of Authority.--The authority provided under 
this section shall terminate [10] 20 years after the date of 
enactment of this Act.

SEC. 206. FEDERAL LAND DISPOSAL ACCOUNT.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

    [(f) Termination.--On termination of activities under 
section 205--
          (1) the Federal Land Disposal Account shall be 
        terminated; and
          (2) any remaining balance in the account shall become 
        available for appropriation under section 3 of the Land 
        and Water Conservation Fund Act (16 U.S.C. 460l-6).]

SEC. 207. SPECIAL PROVISIONS.

    (a) In General.--Nothing in this title provides an 
exemption from any limitation on the acquisition of land or 
interest in land under any Federal law in effect on the date of 
enactment of this Act.
    (b) Other Law.--This title shall not apply to land eligible 
for sale under--
          (1) Public Law [96-568] 96-586 (commonly known as the 
        ``Santini-Burton Act'') (94 Stat. 3381)[; or];
          (2) the Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 
        1998 (Public Law 105-263; 112 Stat. 2343)[.];
          (3) the White Pine County Conservation Recreation, 
        and Development Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-432; 120 
        Stat. 3028);
          (4) the Lincoln County Conservation, Recreation, and 
        Development Act of 2004 (Public Law 108-424; 118 Stat. 
        2403);
          (5) subtitle F of title I of the Omnibus Public Land 
        Management Act of 2009 (16 U.S.C. 1132 note; Public Law 
        111-11);
          (6) subtitle O of title I of the Omnibus Public Land 
        Management Act of 2009 (16 U.S.C. 460www note, 1132 
        note; Public Law 111-11);
          (7) section 2601 of the Omnibus Public Land 
        Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 
        1108); or
          (8) section 2606 of the Omnibus Public Land 
        Management Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-11; 123 Stat. 
        1121).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

                                  

```