99–010

Calendar No. 467

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " SENATE ! 2d Session 107–190

PILT AND REFUGE REVENUE SHARING PERMANENT 

FUNDING ACT

JUNE 28, 2002.—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. 454]

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 454) to provide permanent funding for the Bureau of Land Management Payment in Lieu of Texas program 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. 454 is to amend the Payments in Lieu of Texas 

Act and the Revenue Refuge Sharing Act to provide for the authorized amounts of both programs to be made annually to the Secretary of the Interior without the need for further appropriation. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

The Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act (31 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.) 

(PILT) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to make annual 

payments to units of general local government (usually counties) in 

which entitlement lands are located. ‘‘Entitlement lands’’ include 

Federal lands in the National Forest System and the National Park 

System, lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management, 

and lands dedicated to the use of Federal water resources development projects. Also included are dredge disposal areas under the 

jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers, National Wildlife Reserve Areas withdrawn from the public domain, inactive and semiActive installations used for non-industrial purposes, and certain 

lands donated to the U.S. Government by State and local governments. 

2

The purpose of the PILT program is to partially compensate local 

governments for the loss of property taxes as a result of the nontaxable Federal lands within their boundaries. PILT uses a formula 

to determine the amount of compensation, factoring in Federal 

acreage, local population, and receipt-sharing payments. In 1994, 

Congress amended the formula to adjust it annually based on 

changes in the Consumer Price Index. The authorized level for FY 

2002 is approximately $346 million. All amounts authorized are 

now subject to appropriation. Payments received by local governments may be used for any governmental purpose. 

Historically, appropriations have been less than the authorized 

amount, although they have increased significantly in recent years. 

In FY 1997, $113 million was appropriated, increasing to just 

under $200 million in FY 2001 and $210 million in FY 2003. The 

administration proposed funding level for FY 2003 is $165 million, 

a reduction of $45 million from the FY2002 appropriated level. 

The Refuge Revenue Sharing Fund was established in 1935 to 

provide revenue sharing to units of local government containing national wildlife refuges. Under the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act (16 

U.S.C. 715s) local governments receive either 25 percent of the net 

receipts generated from refuge lands, 3/4 of 1 percent of adjusted 

purchase price of refuge lands, or 75 cents an acre for purchased 

lands, whichever is greater. Under 1976 amendments to the Act, 

the program was expanded to include all lands administered by the 

Fish and Wildlife Service (not just refuge lands) and authorization 

was provided for additional appropriations to supplement the payments if refuge revenues fell below the authorized payment level. 

Like the PILT program, annual payments to local governments 

now fall below the authorized level. For FY 2001 the estimated authorized level was approximately $32 million, while receipts accounted for $4.3 million. Congress appropriated an additional $11.4 

million in FY 2001. 

S. 454 would elimate the need for annual appropriations while 

providing local governments with more certainty in budgeting for 

annual revenues from the PILT and refuge revenue sharing programs. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 454 was introduced by Senator Bingaman on March 5, 2001. 

Senators Thomas, Baucus, Reid, Leahy, Campbell, Ensign, Johnson, Hatch, and Cantwell are cosponsors. The Subcommittee on 

Public Lands and Forests held a hearing on S. 454 on May 9, 2002. 

The Committee on Energy and National Resources ordered S. 454 

favorably reported at its business meeting on June 5, 2002. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 

open business session on June 5, 2002, by a voice vote of a quorum 

present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 454. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 entitles the bill the ‘‘PILT and Refuge Revenue Sharing 

Permanent Funding Act.’’

3

Section 2(a) amends the Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act (31 

U.S.C. 6906) to provide the full authorized amount of the program 

to the Secretary of the Interior in FY 2002 and thereafter without 

further appropriation.

Subsection (b) amends the Refuge Revenue Sharing Act (16 

U.S.C. 715s) to make amounts currently subject to appropriation 

available to the Secretary of the Interior beginning in FY 2002 and 

thereafter without further appropriation. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

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

U.S. CONGRESS, 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, 

Washington, DC, June 20, 2002. 

Hon. JEFF BINGAMAN, 

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 454, the PILT and Refuge 

Revenue Sharing Permanent Funding Act. 

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

to provide them. The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are 

Megan Carroll and Deborah Reis. 

Sincerely, 

BARRY B. ANDERSON

(For Dan L. Crippen, Director). 

Enclosure.

S. 454—PILT and Refuge Revenue Sharing Permanent Funding Act 

Summary: S. 454 would provide new direct spending authority 

for the Secretary of the Interior to make payments to states and 

counties under the payment in lieu of taxes (PILT) program and 

the refuge revenue sharing program. CBO estimates that enacting 

S. 454 would increase direct spending by $157 million in 2002 and 

by $3.9 billion over the 2002–2012 period. Because the bill would 

affect direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures would apply. 

By making PILT and refuge revenue sharing payments fully 

available without appropriation action, S. 454 could create savings 

in discretionary spending. Assuming that annual appropriations 

are reduced accordingly, CBO estimates potential discretionary 

savings of $228 million in fiscal year 2003 and about $1.4 billion 

over the 2003–2007 period. 

S. 454 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. Enacting this legislation probably would benefit local governments that 

receive payments under these two programs. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of S. 454 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 800 (general government).

4

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

DIRECT SPENDING

Mandatory Spending Under Current Law for PILT and Refuge 

Revenue Sharing 1: 

Estimated Budget Authority ................................................ 7 7 8 8 8 8 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................... 7 7 8 8 8 8

Proposed Changes: 

Estimated Budget Authority ................................................ 157 273 278 286 296 305 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................... 157 273 278 286 296 305

Mandatory Spending Under S. 454 for PILT and Refuge Revenue Sharing: 

Estimated Budget Authority 1 .............................................. 164 280 286 294 304 313 

Estimated Outlays ............................................................... 164 280 286 294 304 313

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 2

Estimated Authorization Level ...................................................... 0 ¥228 ¥233 ¥238 ¥242 ¥248 

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................ 0 ¥228 ¥233 ¥238 ¥242 ¥248

1 These figures represent the estimated mandatory portion of annual funding for refuge revenue sharing payments under current law. 2 The changes in spending subject to appropriation represent discretionary savings that could occur under S. 454 beginning in 2003, when 

all PILT and refuge revenue sharing payments would become mandatory spending. A total of $224 million was appropriated for these payments in 2002, including $210 million for PILT and $14 million for refuge revenue sharing. 

Basis of estimate: CBO estimates that enacting S. 454 would increase direct spending for PILT and refuge revenue sharing payments by $157 million in 2002, $273 million in 2003, and about 

$3.7 billion over the 2003–2012 period. Enacting this legislation 

would reduce the need for future appropriations for these programs, but any resulting savings would depend on future appropriation actions. In 2002, funds provided in appropriations acts for 

these payments totaled nearly $230 million. The total estimated 

cost to fully fund the PILT and refuge revenue sharing program in 

2002 is $391 million. 

This estimate is based on information provided by the Department of the Interior and on CBO baseline assumptions regarding 

future payments to local governments under certain other payment 

programs as well as continuing land acquisitions and increases in 

the fair market value of public lands. For this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 454 will be enacted before the end of fiscal year 

2002.

Permanent Funding for PILT 

PILT is a payment program that compensates local governments 

for losses in their tax bases due to the presence of certain federal 

lands within their jurisdictions, which are exempt from state and 

local taxation. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) calculates 

the PILT payment authorized for each local jurisdiction based on 

population, the number of federal acres present, and other federal 

payments received by the jurisdiction. S. 454 would provide permanent funding for PILT payments, which under current law are subject to appropriation. According to BLM, the full authorization level 

for PILT payments in fiscal year 2002 is $351 million, and the 

agency already has received appropriations totaling $210 million 

for those payments. Hence, CBO estimates that fully funding the 

program this year would create direct spending of $141 million. We 

also estimate that S. 454 would create PILT direct spending of 

$241 million in 2003 and about $3.3 billion over the 2003–2012 period. 

5

Refuge Revenue Sharing Payments 

The Refuge Revenue Sharing Act authorizes the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (USFWS) to make payments to counties where national wildlife refuges and other USFWS-administered land is located. Generally, the authorized level of such payments for each 

county is equal to the greater of: (1) $0.75 per acre of USFWS land 

located in the county, (2) 25 percent of net offsetting receipts (if 

any) earned from commercial activities on such land, or (3) threefourths of 1 percent of the land’s fair market value. The annual 

payments are funded by a combination of direct spending authority 

and discretionary appropriations. In the last 20 years, those two 

sources have not been sufficient to fully fund the entire authorized 

level of refuge revenue sharing payments, and each county’s payment has been reduced proportionately. Beginning in fiscal year 

2002, S. 454 would make available without further appropriation 

the entire amount necessary to fund all payments to counties at 

the authorized level. CBO estimates that the bill would increase direct spending by $16 million in 2002, by $32 million in 2003, and 

by $442 million over the 2003–2012 period. 

Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts. The net changes in 

outlays that are subject to pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in 

the following table. For the purposes of enforcing pay-as-you-go 

procedures, only the effects through fiscal year 2006 are counted.

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Changes in outlays .............................. 157 273 278 286 296 305 315 465 478 492 507

Changes in receipts ............................. Not applicable 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 454 contains no 

intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA 

and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

Enacting this legislation probably would benefit local governments 

that receive payments under these two programs. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Megan Carroll and Deborah Reis. Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie Miller. Impact on the Private Sector: Cecil McPherson. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, 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. 454. The bill is not a regulatory measure in the sense of imposing Government-established standards or significant 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. 454. 

6

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The testimony provided by the Department of the Interior at the 

Subcommittee hearing follows:

STATEMENT OF CHRIS KEARNEY, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SEC- RETARY FOR POLICY AND INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, DE- PARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am 

pleased to have the opportunity to testify today on S. 454, 

a bill to make the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) 

Payments-in-Lieu of Taxes (PILT) Program and the Fish 

and Wildlife Service’s Revenue Sharing (RRS) Program 

mandatory. The Administration strongly supports the 

PILT and RRS programs and views them as high priorities, but the Administration is strongly opposed to S. 454 

because it would force the Federal Government to either 

raise taxes or cut into other programs that are integral to 

the President’s budget. 

BACKGROUND

The PILT Act (P.L. 94–565) was passed by Congress in 

1976 to provide payments to local governments in counties 

where certain Federal lands are located within their 

boundaries. PILT is based on the concept that these local 

governments incur costs associated with maintaining infrastructure on Federal lands within their boundaries but are 

unable to collect taxes on these lands; thus, they need to 

be compensated for these costs. The payments are made to 

local governments in lieu of tax revenues and to supplement other Federal land receipts shared with local governments. The amounts available for payments to local governments require annual appropriation by Congress. The 

BLM allocates payments to the formula in the PILT Act. 

The formula takes into account the population within an 

affected unit of local government, the number of acres of 

eligible Federal land, and the amount of certain Federal 

land payments received by the county in the preceding 

year. These payments are other Federal revenues (such as 

receipts from mineral leasing, livestock grazing, and timber harvesting) that the Federal Government transfers to 

the counties. 

The President’s FY 2003 budget request demonstrates 

our commitment to PILT. The Administration requested 

$150 million for FY 2002 for PILT, and this year the Administration is requesting $165 million, an increase of $15 

million that is more in line with historical PILT funding 

levels. Although the FY 2003 budget request appears to indicate a downward trend, I would point out that most 

counties (and their respective states) also receive significant and growing benefits from Federal lands. Many of the 

counties that receive PILT funding receive other Federal 

payments that have recently or will soon increase substantially. For example, the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act passed in 2000 provides for 

7

permanent payment of an additional roughly $110 million 

annually to western Oregon counties—approximately the 

amount the countries received during the mid-1980s peak 

of timber production in the Northwest. I would also point 

out that the Federal government covers many of the costs 

that the counties would otherwise incur if the land were 

not in Federal ownership. 

The Refuge Revenue Sharing Act (16 U.S.C. 715s), as 

amended, was enacted in 1935. It authorizes payments to 

be made to offset tax losses to counties in which U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service (FWS) fee and withdrawn public domain lands are located. The original Act provided for 25 

percent of the net receipts from revenues from the sale or 

other disposition of products on refuge lands to be paid to 

counties. The Act was amended in 1964 to make it more 

like the payment-in-lieu of tax program. The new provisions distinguished between acquired lands that are purchased by the Service and lands that are withdrawn from 

the public domain for administration by the Service. For 

fee lands, the counties received 3⁄4 of 1 percent of the adjusted value of the land or 25 percent of the net receipts, 

whichever was greater, with the value of the land to be reappraised every 5 years. They continued to receive 25 percent of the net receipts collected on the withdrawn public 

domain lands in their county. 

The Act was amended again in 1978 in order to provide 

more equitable payments to counties with lands administered by the Service within their boundaries. The method 

used to determine the adjusted cost of the land acquired 

during the depression years of the 1930’s (using agricultural land indices) resulted in continuing low land values 

compared to the land prices that existed in 1978. Also, 

other lands that were purchased during periods of inflated 

land values were found to be overvalued. The Congress decided that the payments did not adequately reflect current 

tax values of the property. It also recognized that the national wildlife refuges are established first and foremost 

for the protection and enhancement of wildlife and that 

many produce little or no income that could be shared with 

the local county. 

In the 1978 amendments, Congress chose to distinguish 

between lands acquired in fee and lands withdrawn from 

the public domain, by recognizing that the financial impact 

on counties tends to be greater when lands are directly 

withdrawn from the tax rolls, rather than when the refuge 

unit is created out of the public domain and has never 

been subject to a property tax. The formula adopted then, 

and still in effect, allows the Service to pay counties containing lands acquired in fee the greater of: 75 cents per 

acre, 3⁄4 of 1 percent of the fair market value of the land, 

or 25 percent of the net receipts collected from the area. 

If receipts are insufficient to satisfy these payments, appropriations are authorized to make up the difference. 

Counties can use the funds for any governmental purpose, and can pass through the funds to lesser units of 

8

local government within the county that experience a reduction of real property taxes as a result of the existence 

of Service fee lands within their boundaries. Counties with 

Service lands that are withdrawn from the public domain 

continue to receive 25 percent of the receipts collected from 

the area and are paid under the provisions of the PILT 

Act. 

I would like to note that many of the same concerns we 

have expressed regarding PILT funding hold true for RRS 

funding as well. Moreover, we believe that it would be prudent to take another look at the PILT and RRS formulas, 

authorization levels and other issues including those 

raised in the Department’s report to Congress dated January 11, 1999, before considering such a significant action 

as converting these payments to permanent mandatory 

payments. 

CONCLUSION

The Administration recognizes that these payment are 

important to local governments, often comprising a significant portion of their operating budgets. The PILT and RRS 

monies have been used for critical functions such as local 

search and rescue operations, road maintenance, law enforcement, schools, and emergency services. These activities are often undertaken in support of people from around 

the country who visit or recreate on Federal lands. The 

BLM and the FWS look forward to continuing to work cooperatively with the communities on these important 

issues. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I 

would be pleased to answer any question that you or the 

other members may have.

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/Act 

S. 454, 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): 

31 U.S.C. 6906

§ 6906. Authorization of appropriations 

øNecessary amounts may be appropriated to the Secretary of the 

Interior to carry out this chapter. Amounts are available only as 

provided in appropriations laws.¿

There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to the Secretary of the Interior to carry out this chapter. Beginning in fiscal year 2002 and each year thereafter, amounts authorized under this chapter shall be made available to the Secretary 

of the Interior, out of any other funds in the Treasury not otherwise 

appropriated and without further appropriation, for obligation or 

expenditure in accordance with this chapter. 

9

AN ACT To amend the Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act of March 16, 1934, and 

certain other Acts relating to game and other wildlife, administered by 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 I—MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING 

STAMP 

SECTION 1. * * *

* * * * * * *

SEC. 401. * * *

(a) * * *

* * * * * * *

(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS EQUAL TO DIFFERENCE

BETWEEN AMOUNT OF NET RECEIPTS AND AGGREGATE AMOUNT OF

REQUIRED PAYMENTS.—If the net receipts in the fund which are attributable to revenue collections for any fiscal year do not equal the 

aggregate amount of payments required to be made for such fiscal 

year under subsection (c) of this section to counties, there are authorized to be appropriated to the fund an amount equal to the difference between the total amount of net receipts and such aggregate amount of payments. Beginning in fiscal year 2002 and each 

year thereafter, such amount shall be made available to the Secretary, out of any other funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated and without further appropriation, for obligation or expenditure in accordance with this section. 

* * * * * * *

Æ