Disposition of moneys received
In general
Deduction for administrative costs
Rentals received on or after August 8, 2005
Notwithstanding the first sentence of subsection (a) of this section, any rentals received from leases in any State (other than the State of Alaska) on or after
Of the amounts deposited in the Treasury under paragraph (1)—
50 percent shall be paid by the Secretary of the Treasury to the State within the boundaries of which the leased land is located or the deposits were derived; and
50 percent shall be deposited in a special fund in the Treasury, to be known as the “BLM Permit Processing Improvement Fund” (referred to in this subsection as the “Fund”).
For each of fiscal years 2006 through 2015, the Fund shall be available to the Secretary of the Interior for expenditure, without further appropriation and without fiscal year limitation, for the coordination and processing of oil and gas use authorizations on onshore Federal land under the jurisdiction of the Pilot Project offices identified in section 15924(d) of title 42.
Source
(Feb. 25, 1920, ch. 85, § 35, 41 Stat. 450; May 27, 1947, ch. 83, 61 Stat. 119; Aug. 3, 1950, ch. 527, 64 Stat. 402; Pub. L. 85–88, § 2,Notes
References in Text
Codification
Amendments
Effective Date of 1983 Amendment
Savings Provision
Findings
Section 10201 of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (Public Law 103–66; 107 Stat. 407) amended section 35 of the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 191) to change the sharing of onshore mineral revenues and revenues from geothermal steam from a 50:50 split between the Federal Government and the States to a complicated formula that entailed deducting from the State share of leasing revenues ‘50 percent of the portion of the enacted appropriations of the Department of the Interior and any other agency during the preceding fiscal year allocable to the administration of all laws providing for the leasing of any onshore lands or interest in land owned by the United States for the production of the same types of minerals leasable under this Act or of geothermal steam, and to enforcement of such laws * * *’.
There is no legislative record to suggest a sound public policy rationale for deducting prior-year administrative expenses from the sharing of current-year receipts, indicating that this change was made primarily for budget scoring reasons.
The system put in place by this change in law has proved difficult to administer and has given rise to disputes between the Federal Government and the States as to the nature of allocable expenses. Federal accounting systems have proven to be poorly suited to breaking down administrative costs in the manner required by the law. Different Federal agencies implementing this law have used varying methodologies to identify allocable costs, resulting in an inequitable distribution of costs during fiscal years 1994 through 1996. In November 1997, the Inspector General of the Department of the Interior found that ‘the congressionally approved method for cost sharing deductions effective in fiscal year 1997 may not accurately compute the deductions’.
Given the lack of a substantive rationale for the 1993 change in law and the complexity and administrative burden involved, a return to the sharing formula prior to the enactment of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 [