[Federal Register: October 31, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 212)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 65039-65118]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr31oc08-17]
[[Page 65039]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bureau of Land Management
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
43 CFR Parts 2800, 2880, and 2920
Update of Linear Right-of-Way Schedule; Final Rule
[[Page 65040]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
43 CFR Parts 2800, 2880, and 2920
[WO-350-07-1430-PN]
RIN 1004-AD87
Update of Linear Right-of-Way Rent Schedule
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is amending its right-of-
way regulations to update the linear right-of-way rent schedule in 43
CFR parts 2800 and 2880. The rent schedule covers most linear rights-
of-way granted under Title V of the Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976, as amended (FLPMA), and Section 28 of the Mineral Leasing
Act of 1920, as amended (MLA). Those laws require the holder of a
right-of-way grant to pay annually, in advance, the fair market value
to occupy, use, or traverse public lands for facilities such as power
lines, fiber optic lines, pipelines, roads, and ditches.
Section 367 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (the Act) directs the
Secretary of the Interior to update the per acre rent schedule found in
43 CFR 2806.20. The Act requires that the BLM revise the per acre
rental fee zone value schedule by state, county, and type of linear
right-of-way use to reflect current land values in each zone. The Act
also requires the Secretary of Agriculture (Forest Service) to make the
same revisions for rights-of-way on National Forest System (NFS) lands.
DATES: This final rule is effective December 1, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information on the substance of
the final rule, please contact Bil Weigand at (208) 373-3862 or Rick
Stamm at (202) 452-5185. For information on procedural matters, please
contact Ian Senio at (202) 452-5049. Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 to contact the above
individuals during business hours. FIRS is available twenty-four hours
a day, seven days a week, to leave a message or question with the above
individuals. You will receive a reply during normal business hours.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Final Rule as Adopted and Response to Comments
III. Procedural Matters
I. Background
Statutory: Section 367 of the Act, entitled ``Fair Market Value
Determinations for Linear Rights-of-Way Across Public Lands and
National Forests,'' directs the Secretary of the Interior to: (1)
Update 43 CFR 2806.20, which contains the per acre rent schedule for
linear rights-of-way; and (2) Revise the per acre rental fee zone value
schedule by state, county, and type of linear right-of-way uses to
reflect current values of land in each zone. In addition, pursuant to
section 367(a) and (b), the Secretary of Agriculture is adopting BLM's
rent schedule in 43 CFR subpart 2806, as updated by Section 367, for
linear rights-of-way granted, issued, or renewed for use of National
Forest System lands under Title V of FLPMA or Section 28 of the MLA.
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: The BLM published an advance
notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) in the Federal Register on April
27, 2006 (71 FR 24836). The comment period for the ANPR ended on May
30, 2006. The purpose of the ANPR was to encourage members of the
public to provide comments and suggestions to help with updating the
BLM's and the Forest Service's (FS) rent schedule, as described in the
Act. The BLM received ten responses to the ANPR, including comments on
six specific questions posed there. The BLM utilized the comments
received from the ANPR extensively in the development of the proposed
and final rule.
Proposed Rule: The BLM published a proposed rule in the Federal
Register on December 11, 2007 (72 FR 70376). The comment period for the
proposed rule ended on February 11, 2008. The purpose of the proposed
rule was to provide members of the public an opportunity to comment on
the BLM's proposal to update the linear rent schedule, as described in
the Act. The BLM received twelve responses to the proposed rule,
including comments on six specific questions posed there. The BLM
utilized the comments received on the proposed rule extensively in the
development of the final rule.
Previous (1987) Linear Rent Schedule: On July 8, 1987, and
September 30, 1987, the BLM published regulations establishing rent
schedules for linear rights-of-way granted under Section 28 of the MLA
and Title V of FLPMA (52 FR 25818 and 52 FR 36576). The FS used these
same schedules to charge rent for rights-of-way across NFS lands. The
update to these previous schedules contained in this final rule also
affects the FS and users of NFS lands.
The 1987 rent schedule was developed to set fair market rent and
minimize the need for individual real estate appraisals for each right-
of-way requiring rent payments, as well as to avoid the costs, delays,
and unpredictability of the appraisal process in reasonably setting
fair market rent.
The 1987 rent schedule established eight fee zones based on the
distribution of average land values by county in Puerto Rico and in
each of the states, except Alaska and Hawaii. (The 1987 rent schedule
did not apply to Alaska and Hawaii; however, the rent schedule in this
final rule applies to all 50 states and the commonwealth of Puerto
Rico. Linear right-of-way rental fees in Alaska were previously
determined on a case-by-case basis based on local market values. There
are no linear rights-of-way in Hawaii currently administered by either
the BLM or the FS). Under the 1987 regulations, a county was assigned
to one of the eight zone values, based on average land values in the
county: lower-value counties were assigned lower-numbered zones. The
eight zone values contained in the 1987 schedule were set at $50, $100,
$200, $300, $400, $500, $600, and $1,000 per acre. A county's zone
value was translated into a per acre zone rent by use of the adjustment
formula described below. To calculate the annual right-of-way rental
payment, the zone rent was multiplied by the total acreage within the
right-of-way. The formula for zone rent was:
Zone rent = (zone value) x (impact adjustment) x (Treasury Security
Rate) x (annual adjustment factor)
The zone value term in the formula was the land value that was
established for each of the eight zones. The zone values established in
1987 were never updated, although it is generally recognized that land
values increased significantly in most areas from 1987 to the present.
The impact adjustment term (or encumbrance factor) in the formula
reflected the differences in land-use impacts between: (1) Oil, gas,
and other energy-related pipelines, roads, ditches, and canals; and (2)
Electrical transmission and distribution lines, telephone lines, and
non-energy related pipelines. Energy-related pipelines and roads were
considered as having a greater surface disturbance impact on the land,
and were adjusted to 80 percent of the zone value. Electrical
transmission and distribution lines, phone lines, and non-energy
related pipelines with a smaller area of disturbance were adjusted to
70 percent of the zone value.
[[Page 65041]]
The Treasury Security term in the formula reflected a reasonable
rate of return to the United States for the use of the land within the
right-of-way. The 1987 regulations were based on a rate of return of
6.41 percent for a 1-year Treasury Security.
The zone rent was adjusted annually by the change in the Gross
Domestic Product, Implicit Price Deflator index.
BLM Right-of-Way Program and Revenues: The BLM administers 96,000
rights-of-way, of which 66,000 are authorized under FLPMA and 30,000
are authorized under the MLA. However, only 48,600 are subject to a
rental payment. Wyoming and New Mexico together account for slightly
more than 30,000 of the rights-of-way subject to rent. The BLM
collected approximately $20.6 million in right-of-way rental receipts
for fiscal year 2007. This total includes receipts from both linear and
site-type rights-of-way. Seventy-seven percent of all right-of-way rent
receipts were collected by five BLM State Offices. These five State
Offices and the revenues collected are listed in Table 1.
Table 1--Right-of-Way Rental Receipts for ``Top Five'' BLM State Offices
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total rental
State office receipts (FY
2007)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nevada.................................................. $4,386,150
Wyoming................................................. 4,086,382
California.............................................. 3,210,892
New Mexico.............................................. 2,669,556
Arizona................................................. 1,408,414
Total............................................... 15,761,394
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rent receipts from communication uses, which have their own rent
schedule, totaled approximately $5 million, while receipts from other
site-type rights-of-way, which normally require an appraisal to
determine rent, and/or initial ad hoc billings, totaled approximately
$9 million.
In fiscal year 2007, the BLM collected $6.5 million total rent for
12,545 linear rights-of-ways using the previous schedule. Of this
amount, only 133 bills (for $52,400) were for rental payment periods
(the length of time for which the holder is paying rent) of less than 1
year. The largest number of bills (5,864) was issued for one-year
rental payment periods. The rent collected from these one-year bills
totaled $4,781,000 ($815 per bill) and included approximately $852,000
for linear rights-of-way located in high value areas, such as in Clark
County, Nevada, near the city of Las Vegas. The rent for these bills
was generated using a similar methodology as the linear rent schedule,
but was calculated using higher land values supported by appraisal data
(used to develop ``unique zones'' with annual per acre rent values
ranging from $280 to $6,000). Another 4,993 bills were issued for
$133,172, covering a 5-year rental payment period. The average 5-year
bill totaled $27, or less than $6 per bill on an annual basis. Lastly,
a total of $89,000 was billed for rental payment periods of between 6
and 30 years.
To summarize, in fiscal year 2007 the BLM collected a total of
$20.6 million in right-of-way rent receipts, but of that only $5.6
million was calculated using the previous Per Acre Rent Schedule.
Another $852,000 was calculated using similar methodology as the Per
Acre Rent Schedule, but was calculated using higher land values (unique
zones) supported by appraisal data. In addition, over half of all bills
generated for linear right-of-way grants in fiscal year 2007 were for
multi-year periods of 2 years or more.
Interagency Coordination: The United States Department of
Agriculture, Forest Service (FS), will adopt without rulemaking the
revisions to the linear right-of-way rent schedule at 43 CFR 2806.20
promulgated by the BLM through this final rule. To enhance consistency
between the BLM and the FS, the FS has indicated that it will
incorporate some of the procedural or otherwise nonsubstantive changes
into its directive system. The FS will be publishing a notice of its
adoption of BLM's rental schedule pursuant to this rule and its
incorporation of other changes in subpart 2806.
II. Final Rule as Adopted and Response to Comments
Part 2800 Rights-of-Way Under FLPMA
The BLM is amending the Per Acre Rent Schedule in its right-of-way
regulations in 43 CFR parts 2800 and 2880. The rent schedule covers
most linear rights-of-way granted under Title V of FLPMA and Section 28
of the MLA. These laws require the holder of a right-of-way grant to
pay annually, in advance, the fair market value to occupy, use, or
traverse public lands for facilities such as power lines, fiber optic
lines, pipelines, roads, and ditches.
As mentioned above, the Act directs the Secretary of the Interior
to update the per acre rent schedule in the BLM's previous regulations
at 43 CFR 2806.20. The Act specifically requires that the BLM revise
the per acre rental fee zone value schedule by state, county, and type
of linear right-of-way use to reflect current land values in each zone.
The Per Acre Rent Schedule applies to linear rights-of-way the BLM
issues under 43 CFR parts 2800 and 2880. So as not to be redundant, we
discuss the components and application of the rent schedule primarily
in part 2800 and will not repeat those discussions in part 2880.
However, we will note any differences in part 2880 that are necessary
based upon specific statutory provisions of the MLA.
In addition to revising the Per Acre Rent Schedule, the final rule
makes minor amendments to parts 2800 and 2880 to bring the previous
regulations into compliance with the statutory rent schedule changes.
Finally, there are a number of minor corrections and changes in the
final rule that are not directly related to the rent schedule. These
changes are limited in scope and address trespass and the new rental
payments, land status changes, annual rental payments, MLA hardship
provisions, and reimbursements of monitoring costs and processing fees.
These latter items correct some errors in the previous regulations and
clarify others. This final rule:
(1) Makes clear that the rent exemptions listed in section 2806.14
do not apply if the applicant/holder is in trespass;
(2) Provides that only the Per Acre Rent Schedule will be used to
determine rent for linear right-of-way grants, unless the land
encumbered by the grant is to be transferred out of Federal ownership;
(3) Provides for an annual rent payment term when the annual rent
for non-individuals is $500 or more;
(4) Provides for a one-time rent payment for grants and easements
when the land encumbered by the grant or easement is to be transferred
out of Federal ownership;
(5) Provides for a limited phase-in provision to all holders for
calendar year 2009, and, a possible additional phase-in period upon
revision of the rent schedule under sections 2806.22(b) and 2885.19(a);
(6) Revises section 2920.6 to require reimbursement of processing
and monitoring costs under sections 2804.14 and 2805.16 for
applications for leases and permits issued under Title III of FLPMA;
(7) Amends section 2920.8(b) to assess a non-refundable processing
fee and monitoring fee under sections 2804.14 and 2805.16 for each
request for renewal, transfer, or assignment of a lease or easement;
(8) Amends sections 2805.11(b)(2) and 2885.11(a) so that all
grants, except those issued for a term of 3 years or less and those
issued in perpetuity under
[[Page 65042]]
FLPMA, expire on December 31 of the final year of the grant; and
(9) Amends sections 2805.14(f) and 2885.12(e) to make it clear that
you may assign your grant, without the BLM's prior written approval, if
your authorization so provides.
We received many comments on the proposed rule that addressed
issues common to both the part 2800 and part 2880 regulations. So as
not to be redundant, we address the comments only in the section they
pertain to in the part 2800 regulations. Comments that specifically
address the part 2880 regulations are discussed in that section of the
preamble.
Subpart 2805--Terms and Conditions of Grants
The BLM is making two minor amendments in 2 sections in subpart
2805, which addresses the terms and conditions of FLPMA right-of-way
authorizations.
Section 2805.11 What does a grant contain?
Previous section 2805.11(b)(2) stated that all grants, except those
issued for a term of less than 1 year and those issued in perpetuity,
expire on December 31 of the final year of the grant. The BLM uses the
calendar year, not the fiscal year or the anniversary date, to
establish the rental period for grants. Expiration of grants on
December 31 allows for consistency and ease of administration, because
after the initial billing period only full calendar years are included
in subsequent billing periods. However, the BLM often issues short-term
right-of-way grants for 3 years or less to allow the holder to conduct
temporary activities on public land. Previous section 2806.23(b) and
final section 2806.24(c) both explain that the BLM considers the first
partial calendar year in the rent payment period to be the first year
of the rental term. Therefore, under previous section 2805.11(b)(2), a
3-year grant actually had a term period of 2 years plus the time period
remaining in the calendar year of issuance. A 2-year grant had a term
period of 1 year plus the time period remaining in the calendar year of
issuance. Depending on when the grant was issued, the actual term could
have been just over 2 years for a 3-year grant and could have been just
over 1 year for a 2-year grant. Under the final rule, all grants,
except those issued for a term of 3 years or less and those issued in
perpetuity, expire on December 31 of the final year of the grant. The
changes to this section allow holders to use short-term grants for the
full period of the grant. For example, if a 3-year grant is issued
under the final rule on October 1, 2008, it would expire on September
30, 2011, instead of December 31, 2010, under the previous rule. If a
2-year grant is issued under the final rule on October 1, 2008, it
expires on September 30, 2010, instead of December 31, 2009, under the
previous rule. In most cases, the BLM would assess a one-time rental
bill for the term of the grant, which would reduce any administrative
impact which might otherwise result from this change. We received no
comments on the proposed changes to this section, and the final rule
adopts the proposed section without change.
Section 2805.14 What rights does a grant convey?
Previous section 2805.14(f) stated that you had a right to assign
your grant to another, provided that you obtained the BLM's prior
written approval. The BLM proposed adding the phrase ``unless your
grant specifically states that such approval is unnecessary'' at the
end of this sentence to indicate that BLM's prior written approval may
be unnecessary in certain cases. In most cases, assignments would
continue to be subject to the BLM's written approval. However, with
this change, the BLM could amend existing grants to allow future
assignments without the BLM's prior written approval. This may be
especially important to the future administration of a grant when the
land encumbered by a grant is being transferred out of Federal
ownership, and there is a request to convert an existing grant to an
easement or a perpetual grant under section 2807.15(c). We received no
comments on the proposed changes to this section and the final rule
adopts the proposed section without change.
Subpart 2806--Rents
Sections 2806.10 through 2806.16 of subpart 2806 contain general
rent provisions that apply to grants. No changes were proposed to these
general provisions except to section 2806.14.
Section 2806.14 Under what circumstances am I exempt from paying rent?
Previous section 2806.14 identified those circumstances where a
holder or facility is exempt from paying rent. None of the previous
circumstances change under the final rule. We have, however, added a
provision (final section 2806.14(b)) that states that the exemptions in
this section do not apply if you are in trespass. The addition of this
provision makes it clear that the penalties specified in subpart 2808--
Trespass, which include the assessment of rent for use of the public
land, and possible additional penalties based upon the rent value,
apply to all entities in trespass, even those entities that may
otherwise be exempt from paying rent under section 2806.14. This is
consistent with how trespass penalties are assessed under current
policy, and provides for consistency with similar provisions in subpart
2888--Trespass. Current section 2888.10(c) states that the BLM will
administer trespass actions for MLA grants and temporary use permits
(TUPs) as set forth in sections 2808.10(c) and 2808.11, except that the
rental exemption provisions of part 2800 do not apply to grants issued
under part 2880. Adding a new provision at section 2806.14(b) makes it
clear that the rental exemption provisions do not apply to trespass
situations covered under subpart 2808, as they likewise do not apply to
trespass situations covered under subpart 2888. The final rule removes
the existing phrase ``except that the rental exemption provisions of
part 2800 (section 2806.14) do not apply to grants issued under this
part'' from section 2888.10(c), because the cross reference is no
longer necessary (see preamble discussion for proposed section
2888.10(c)). We received no comments on the proposed changes to this
section and the final rule adopts the proposed section without change.
Section 2806.20 What is the rent for a linear right-of-way grant?
This section explains that the BLM will use the Per Acre Rent
Schedule, except as described in section 2806.26, to calculate annual
rent for linear right-of-way grants. The per acre rent from the
schedule (for all types of linear right-of-way facilities regardless of
the granting authority, e.g., FLPMA, MLA, and their predecessors) is
the product of 4 factors: The per acre zone value multiplied by the
encumbrance factor multiplied by the rate of return multiplied by the
annual adjustment factor. The following discussion explains how the BLM
adjusted these factors in the previous and proposed Per Acre Rent
Schedule to arrive at the Per Acre Rent Schedule in the final rule,
including the determination of per acre land values by county, as
directed by the Act.
Use of a Schedule
Section 367 of the Act directs the Secretary of the Interior to
``revise the per acre rental fee zone value schedule by State, county,
and type of linear right-of-way use to reflect current values of land
in each zone.'' Therefore, the final rule retains the use of a schedule
[[Page 65043]]
and no alternative rental fee options were considered.
County Land Values--Use of Published Data
In the 1987 rent schedule, the average per acre land value for each
county was based upon a review of the typical per acre value for the
types of lands that the BLM and the FS had allocated to various utility
and right-of-way facilities. These values were mapped, reviewed, and
adjusted, resulting in the placement of each county (except Coconino
County, Arizona, which was split by the Colorado River) in one of eight
zones ranging in value from $50 to $1,000 per acre.
In the ANPR, the BLM requested comments regarding what available
published information, statistical data, or reports the BLM should use
to update the current linear right-of-way rental fee zone values. The
BLM stated in the ANPR that it was considering using existing published
information or statistical data for updating the rent schedule, such as
information published by the National Agricultural Statistics Service
(NASS). The NASS publishes two reports:
(1) The Census of Agriculture, published every 5 years (NASS
Census); and
(2) The annual Land Values and Cash Rents Summary (Annual Report).
The NASS Census provides average per acre land and building values
by county, or other geographical areas, for each state. The land values
are reported individually for cropland (including irrigated and non-
irrigated cropland), woodland, pastureland, and rangeland, and an
``other'' category that includes non-commercial, non-residential
building lots, wasteland, and land with roads and ponds. The average
per acre land and building values do not include any value for the
crop, forage, or woodland products produced from the land.
The NASS data in the Annual Report, as compared to the data in the
NASS Census (see previous paragraph), includes average per acre values
for cropland, pastureland, and farm real estate, but only on a regional
or statewide basis, and not on a countywide basis. Another difference
between the Annual Report and the NASS Census is the absence of any
data for Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico in the Annual Report. You can
find more detailed information about the NASS Census and the Annual
Report at the NASS Web site at: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.nass.usda.gov/index.asp.
The BLM received four comments in response to our request in the
ANPR for comment on the use of available published information. One
commenter said that the NASS data is appropriate. Two commenters
recommended using the NASS Census of Agriculture (5-year census) for
county-level data. One commenter stated that the NASS data seems
appropriate for updating the schedule, so long as agricultural uses are
not reflected in the land values used.
In the development of the proposed rule, the BLM generally agreed
with the commenters on the ANPR that supported the use of the NASS
Census data to determine the average per acre value for each county,
except for the commenter that supported its use so long as agricultural
uses are not reflected in the land values used. The NASS publishes
average per acre land and building values, by state and county, each 5-
year period in its NASS Census report. The most recent county values
are from the 2002 NASS Census, which was published in June 2004. The
next NASS Census report will provide 2007 data, and it is due to be
published in June 2009. However, the NASS county per acre land and
building value data is reflective of the types of agricultural uses
generally occurring in that county, including land value data reported
for cropland (including irrigated and non-irrigated cropland),
woodland, pastureland, and rangeland, and an ``other'' category that
includes non-commercial, non-residential building lots, wasteland, and
land with roads and ponds. Land administered by the BLM and FS have
many of the same agricultural values (grazing, commercial timber
production, woodland and vegetative sales (Christmas trees, firewood,
mushrooms, pine nuts, seed crops from native species, etc.). The
average per acre land and building values do not include any value for
the crop, forage, or woodland product produced from the land. In the
proposed rule, we further explained that other Federal and state
agencies regularly use the NASS Census data when it is necessary to
obtain average per acre land value for a particular state or county. In
addition, Congress specifically endorsed the use of this data for
rental determination purposes when it passed the ``National Forest
Organizational Camp Fee Improvement Act of 2003'' (Pub. L. 108-7) (16
U.S.C. 6231). This law established a formula for determining rent for
organizational camps located on NFS lands by applying a 5 percent rate
of return to the average per acre land and building value, by state and
county, as reported in the most recent NASS Census. That law also
provided for a process to update the per acre land values annually
based on the change in per acre land value, by county, from one census
period to another. The law does not mandate the use of zones or a
schedule, which eliminates the need for an annual index adjustment to
keep the schedule or zones current. However, the range between the high
and low county values which results from using the components mandated
under Public Law 108-7, including the use of a 100 percent encumbrance
factor, is significantly greater than the range between the high and
low zone values which result from using the components established
under either the proposed or final rule.
The proposed rule used the entire average per acre land and
building value (by state and county) from the 2002 NASS Census to place
the county or geographical area into the proper zone value in the rent
schedule. We used the entire average per acre land and building value
to be consistent with how Congress used the same data in determining
annual per acre rent for organizational camps located on NFS lands as
described above. We also used the entire per acre land and building
value from the NASS Census because both BLM and FS lands have many of
the same agricultural values reflected in the NASS Census data.
The BLM received several comments on the proposed rule's use of the
entire average per acre land and building value (by state and county)
from the NASS Census to place the county or geographical area into the
proper zone value in the rent schedule. The majority of the commenters
stated that the average per acre land and building value should be
reduced to remove land with buildings or other improvements, but
offered no recommendations on how this should be accomplished. Some of
the commenters stated that irrigated cropland should also be removed
from the average per acre land and building value, pointing out that in
most cases the average per acre value of irrigated land is
significantly higher than non-irrigated land. These commenters
recommended reducing the average per acre land and building value in
the NASS Census by 50 percent, but offered no data to support a 50
percent reduction, except to state that lands administered by the BLM
and FS are not used for irrigated cropland production, nor do they
contain rural farm buildings, and therefore, the average per acre land
and building value should be reduced by at least 50 percent.
We agree that the average per acre land and building value for each
county should be reduced by an amount that
[[Page 65044]]
reflects the value of irrigated cropland and land encumbered by
buildings because BLM- and FS-administered lands do not include these
land categories. The BLM consulted with officials from the NASS on an
appropriate methodology to arrive at this figure. The NASS advised us
that this calculation can be accomplished by comparing the total value
of irrigated acres and acres in the ``other'' category, to the total
value of all farmland acres. In 2002, there were a total of 938,300,000
acres of rural farmland, composed of 434,200,000 acres of cropland
(50,300 acres irrigated); 395,300,000 acres of pasture/rangeland
(5,000,000 acres irrigated); 75,900,000 acres of woodland; and
32,900,000 acres in an ``other'' category (roads, ponds, wasteland, and
land encumbered by non-commercial/non-residential buildings). In 2007,
the average per acre value of all land in all categories equaled $2,160
for a total farm real estate value of $2,026,728,000,000. This compares
to an average per acre land value of $4,736 for all irrigated cropland
(a total value of $261,900,000,000 for the 55.3 million acres of
irrigated cropland) or approximately 12.9 percent of the total value of
all farmland. Thus, to eliminate the irrigated cropland value from the
average per acre land and building value of each county, a 13 percent
reduction is necessary.
To determine a similar value for the ``building'' component of the
average per acre land and building value is more difficult, since only
the total number of acres in the ``other'' category is known (32.9
million acres, which includes acres encumbered by roads, ponds, non-
commercial/non-residential buildings, and wastelands). In addition,
unlike the average per acre values that have been determined by NASS
for pastureland/rangeland ($1,160), all cropland ($2,700), irrigated
cropland ($4,736) and all farm real estate ($2,160), the average per
acre value for the ``other'' category is not available. However, since
the lands in this category are basically non-productive, their average
per acre value is likely less than the average per acre value for
pastureland/rangeland ($1,160). Even so, if all 32.9 million acres were
valued at $1,160 per acre, the total value of all lands in the
``other'' category would equal $38,164,000,000, or less than 2 percent
of the total value of all farm real estate. If all lands in the
``other'' category are valued the same as irrigated cropland ($4,736),
their total value would still only be 7.7 percent of all farm real
estate. Therefore, in the final rule we reduced the average per acre
land and building value by 20 percent (a 13 percent reduction for all
irrigated acres and a 7 percent reduction for all lands in the
``other'' category which includes all improved land or land encumbered
by buildings) to eliminate the value of all land that could possibly be
encumbered by buildings or which could possibly have been developed,
improved, or irrigated.
One commenter suggested that the value for non-irrigated cropland
should also be deleted from the average per acre land and building
value because of its commercial nature and its dissimilarity to public
and NFS lands. The BLM disagrees with this comment. In the 2007 Annual
Report, the NASS provided the average value per acre of non-irrigated
land in 20 states, including most of the states in the west with large
acreages of public and NFS lands, except for the states of Arizona and
Nevada where there is very little cropland that is not irrigated. The
average value per acre of non-irrigated land is $1,963, and the average
value per acre of pasture land in these same 20 states (excluding
Arizona and Nevada) is $1,976. If the average per acre pastureland
values were included for Arizona and Nevada, the average value per acre
of pasture land for all 22 states is $1,926. Thus, there is little
difference in the mid-western and western states between the average
per acre values of non-irrigated cropland and pastureland/rangeland. In
the eastern United States, Federal land holdings, including NFS lands,
have largely been acquired from the private sector (primarily farm real
estate) and would likely fall into the same land categories covered by
the NASS Census. As a result, no further reductions to the average per
acre land and building value (other than the 20 percent reduction
discussed above for irrigated lands and buildings) are made in the
final rule.
In the ANPR the BLM requested comments regarding whether the
proposed Per Acre Rent Schedule should split some states and counties
into more than one zone. The BLM received three ANPR comments
addressing whether some counties should be split into more than one
zone. One commenter said that any consideration of splitting states or
counties into more than one zone should involve discussions with
stakeholders. One commenter said that zones smaller than a single
county may lead to undue administrative burden for the BLM
(establishing boundaries and collecting data). For very high-valued
lands, rent could be based on 25 percent of the assessed value,
according to one commenter. Alternatively, high-valued BLM lands could
be sold or exchanged. One commenter said that wide variations in land
values within a state or county may require applying the zone
methodology at the sub-state or sub-county level. In the proposed rule,
the BLM did not split any county into more than one zone because there
was no published data, easily obtainable, that would support making
such a split. We received one comment on the proposed rule suggesting
that multiple zones be established where land values vary greatly
within a single county. However, the commenter did not indicate how
such variations in land values could be easily obtained or identified
within each county entity. The BLM believes that it is not possible to
make easy or accurate determinations of variations in land values
within each county, and therefore the final rule does not split any
county into more than one zone.
The BLM also requested in the ANPR comments regarding whether the
proposed Per Acre Rent Schedule should apply to Alaska. One commenter
stated that the new linear right-of-way rent schedule should apply to
public and NFS lands in Alaska if similar published data for land
values is available for Alaska as for the lower 48 states and the data
produces a reasonable per acre rental value. As a result, we proposed
that the schedule apply to Alaska since the NASS Census does include
average per acre land and building values for 5 Alaska areas:
Fairbanks; Anchorage; Kenai Peninsula; Aleutian Islands; and Juneau.
These NASS data produce a reasonable per acre rental value and are
comparable to the per acre rental values from contracted appraisals
and/or local rent schedules now in effect in some BLM and FS offices.
The NASS Census data does not define the actual boundaries for the 5
areas, and therefore we specifically asked for comments to assist the
BLM and the FS in determining and identifying the on-the-ground area to
be included in each of the 5 Alaska areas in the NASS Census. For
example, the NASS Census average per acre land and building value for
the Fairbanks ``area'' could be used for all public lands administered
by the BLM Fairbanks District Office and the NASS Census average per
acre land and building value for the Anchorage ``area'' could apply to
all public lands administered by the BLM Anchorage District Office, and
so forth. Another approach, which both the BLM and the FS prefer, would
be to identify specific geographic or management areas and apply the
most appropriate per acre land and building value from the 5 Alaska
NASS Census areas to the BLM/FS identified
[[Page 65045]]
geographic or management areas based on similar landscapes and/or
similar average per acre land values. The proposed rule stated that the
FS planned to use the NASS census data for the Kenai Peninsula for all
NFS lands in Alaska, except for NFS lands located in the Anchorage and
Juneau areas. For NFS lands located in the Municipality of Anchorage,
the NASS Census data for the Anchorage area would apply. For NFS lands
in the downtown Juneau area (Juneau voting precincts 1, 2, and 3), the
NASS Census data for the Juneau area would apply.
The BLM received 2 comments on how the NASS Census data should be
applied to public and NFS lands in Alaska. Both commenters generally
supported the methodology of the proposed per acre rent schedule (with
minor exceptions), but varied slightly in the geographical application
of the five NASS Census areas for Alaska. One commenter agreed with the
proposal of using the NASS Census data for the Kenai Peninsula for all
NFS lands in Alaska, except for NFS lands located in the Anchorage and
Juneau area. The commenter stated that for NFS lands located in the
Municipality of Anchorage, the NASS Census data for the Anchorage area
should apply, and for NFS lands in the downtown Juneau area, the NASS
Census data for the Juneau area should apply. For the BLM, the
commenter proposed that the NASS Census data for the Kenai Peninsula
(Zone 4) apply to all public lands within the BLM Anchorage District
boundaries, except for public lands in the Anchorage (Zone 6 in the
proposed rule; Zone 5 in the final rule due to the 20 percent reduction
in the average per acre land and building value--see discussion above),
Juneau (Zone 11), and the Aleutian Island Chain (Zone 1) areas. The
commenter said that for public lands located in the Municipality of
Anchorage, the NASS Census data for the Anchorage area (Zone 5 in the
final rule) should apply and for public lands in the downtown Juneau
area (Juneau voting precincts 1,2, and 3), the NASS Census data for the
Juneau area (Zone 11) should apply. For public lands in the Aleutian
Island Chain, the NASS Census data for the Aleutian Islands Area (Zone
1) should apply. In addition, the NASS Census data for the Fairbanks
Area (Zone 3) should apply to all public lands within the BLM Fairbanks
District boundaries. The commenter stated that these zone definitions
and values would be consistent with both the suggestion in the proposed
rule and the general fee schedule previously developed by the Appraisal
Services Directorate (ASD), Alaska, for the BLM and the United States
Fish and Wildlife Service. The BLM agrees with the commenter's
suggestions because these zone definitions and values closely match
previous rent schedules/values developed by the ASD for these same
geographical areas. Therefore, in the final rule the BLM will apply the
NASS Census data for Alaska to the geographical and administrative
areas as follows:
Aleutian Islands Area--all lands within the Aleutian Islands Chain--
Zone 1;
Fairbanks Area--all lands within the BLM Fairbanks District
boundaries--Zone 3;
Kenai Peninsula Area--all lands within the BLM Anchorage District
boundaries excluding the Aleutian Islands Chain, the Anchorage Area,
and the Juneau Area--Zone 4;
Anchorage Area--all lands within the Municipality of Anchorage--Zone 5;
and
Juneau Area--all lands within downtown Juneau (Juneau voting precincts
1, 2 and 3)--Zone 11.
The second commenter, while disagreeing with some of the individual
elements in the formula, stated that the rent formula, when taken as a
whole, is well structured and should be extended, as described, to
Alaska. This commenter did note, however, that the 2002 appraisal
completed for the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) right-of-way set
a $391 per acre land value for Federal lands north of the Yukon River
and suggested that the BLM use this as justification to place these
lands into Zone 2 instead of Zone 3, as proposed. We do not dispute the
per acre value of Federal lands north of the Yukon River as determined
by the 2002 TAPS appraisal. We do, however, note that in arriving at an
annual per acre rental value for these lands, the 2002 TAPS appraisal
utilized an encumbrance factor of 100 percent (later reduced to
approximately 86.49 percent) and an 8 percent rate of return. When
taken together, these components of the TAPS appraisal produced an
annual per acre rental value of approximately $31 (later reduced to
$27) for Federal lands north of the Yukon River and an average per acre
rental value of approximately $35 (later reduced to $30) for all
Federal lands along the TAPS corridor. In comparison, the proposed rent
schedule would have generated an annual per acre rental value of $32.35
in 2002, while the final rule would have generated $26.35. Therefore,
the BLM agrees with the commenter, that while issue can be taken with
individual elements of the final per acre rent schedule, when taken as
a whole, the schedule is well constructed and produces a reasonable per
acre rent for all zones. In the final rule, the TAPS will be assessed
Zone 3 rates for all public land acres within the BLM Fairbanks
District boundaries, and Zone 4 rates for all public land and NFS land
acres within the BLM Anchorage District boundaries and the Chugach
National Forest.
Puerto Rico, which has no public lands administered by the BLM, is
not divided into counties. However, the NASS publishes average farmland
values for the entire Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. The proposed rule
stated that the FS planned to use the NASS average farmland values
($5,866 per acre in 2002) for linear right-of-way authorizations
located on NFS lands in Puerto Rico. The BLM included this same amount
($5,866 per acre in 2002) for Puerto Rico in the proposed rule for use
by the BLM in the event that the BLM were to issue and administer
future linear authorizations in Puerto Rico (for example, a MLA grant
which involved lands administered by two or more Federal agencies could
be issued/administered by the BLM). We received no comments on this
issue and made no changes to the final rule.
Per Acre Zone Values
The 1987 linear rent schedule contained eight separate zones
representing average per acre land value from $50 per acre to a $1,000
per acre. The schedule contained two zones with a $50 range, five zones
with a $100 range, and one zone with a $400 range. All the counties in
the 48 contiguous states, except one, and Puerto Rico were in one of
the eight zones based on their estimated average per acre land value.
The lone exception was Coconino County, Arizona, where the area north
of the Colorado River was in one zone, and the area south of the river
was in a different zone.
In the ANPR, the BLM requested comments regarding the appropriate
number of rental zones for the revised rent schedule, and received
three comments. One commenter said that the number of zones (8) in the
current schedule is sufficient. Two commenters said that the number of
zones should not be changed, unless the NASS Census data indicates the
need for a change.
In the proposed rule, the number of zones was increased from the
previous 8 to 12 in order to accommodate the range of 3,080 county land
values contained in the NASS Census. For the same reason, it was
necessary to increase the dollar value per zone. In
[[Page 65046]]
the 2002 NASS Census, the county land and building value per acre
ranged from a low of $75 to a high of $98,954. To accommodate such a
wide range in average per acre land values, the BLM proposed 2 zones
with $250 increments, 3 zones with $500 increments, 1 zone with a
$1,000 increment, 1 zone with a $2,000 increment, 1 zone with a $5,000
increment, 2 zones with $10,000 increments, 1 zone with a $20,000
increment, and 1 zone with a $50,000 increment (see Table 2--Zone
Thresholds).
Table 2--Zone Thresholds
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 county land and building
Zone value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zone 1.............................. $1 to $250.
Zone 2.............................. $251 to $500.
Zone 3.............................. $501 to $1,000.
Zone 4.............................. $1,001 to $1,500.
Zone 5.............................. $1,501 to $2,000.
Zone 6.............................. $2,001 to $3,000.
Zone 7.............................. $3,001 to $5,000.
Zone 8.............................. $5,001 to $10,000.
Zone 9.............................. $10,001 to $20,000.
Zone 10............................. $20,001 to $30,000.
Zone 11............................. $30,001 to $50,000.
Zone 12............................. $50,001 to $100,000.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed rule's zones accommodate the per acre land and
building values of 100 percent of the total number of counties in the
2002 NASS Census (see Table 3). As land values increase or decrease, it
may be necessary to adjust the number of zones and/or the dollar value
per zone. The proposed rule allowed adjustments to the number of zones
and/or the dollar value per zone after the publication of every other
NASS Census (once each ten-year period). The adjustments must
accommodate 100 percent of the county per acre land and building values
reflected in the 5-Year Census. In the proposed rule, the BLM
specifically asked for comments on whether 100 percent of the counties
should be covered by the per acre rent schedule.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31OC08.000
The BLM received several comments that supported the number of
zones, the zone values, and the placement of all NASS counties within
the appropriate zone value. One commenter encouraged the BLM and the FS
to verify that the zone values reflect actual undeveloped, non-
irrigated land values in rural areas of the country adjacent to the
public and NFS lands, to ensure that the land values within each zone
are appropriate, and the zones assigned to different counties are
accurate. We believe that we have addressed this concern by removing
all irrigated land and land encumbered by buildings from the
calculation of land value and reducing the average per acre land and
building values by 20 percent from those shown in the proposed rule.
Even with this reduction, we do not believe that the number of zones or
the zone values require adjustment. There are still several counties
that would fall into Zone 12, even with the 20 percent reduction.
Another commenter suggested that the BLM should discard the zone
brackets entirely and use the actual NASS Census land and building
value for each county. The BLM considered this option in the
development of the proposed rule, but did not believe it conformed to
the Congressional mandate provided in Section 367 of the Act to revise
the existing schedule by state, county, and type of uses to reflect
current land values in each zone. The commenter also suggested that in
lieu of using the actual NASS Census value for each county, the BLM
should utilize the midpoint of the zone value to base its calculations
instead of the upper limit value of each zone. Again, the BLM
considered this option in the development of the proposed rule, but did
not adopt it because this calculation change would have been
significantly different from the methodology used in the previous
schedule (which utilized the upper zone amount and not the midpoint in
making the per acre rental calculations) and its use would have
generated significantly lower per acre rent amounts, while land values
have generally increased. As a result, we made no adjustments to the
number of zones in the final rent schedule, the zone amounts, or the
methodology used
[[Page 65047]]
in the calculation of the per acre rent for each zone.
The 2002 NASS Census per acre land and building value for each
county (or similar area) and the corresponding zone number in the Per
Acre Rent Schedule (based on 80 percent of the 2002 NASS Census per
acre land and building value for each county) are listed for
informational purposes at the end of this final rule. Most of the areas
subject to the Per Acre Rent Schedule are called ``counties.''
Exceptions include Alaska ``areas,'' the ``Commonwealth'' of Puerto
Rico, and Louisiana ``parishes.'' To make the terminology uniform in
this rule, all such areas are referred to as counties.
Encumbrance Factor
The BLM proposed an encumbrance factor (EF) of 50 percent for all
types of linear right-of-way facilities. This is a change from the
previous rule where the EF for roads and energy-related pipelines and
other facilities was 80 percent and the EF for telephone and electrical
transmission facilities was 70 percent. The proposed change is the
result of public comments on the ANPR, a review of industry practices
in the private sector, and a review of the Department of the Interior
(DOI) appraisal methodology for right-of-way facilities located on
Federal lands.
The EF is a measure of the degree that a particular type of
facility encumbers the right-of-way area or excludes other types of
land uses. If the EF is 100 percent, the right-of-way facility (and its
operation) is encumbering the right-of-way area to the exclusion of all
other uses. The land use rent for such a facility would be calculated
on the full value of the subject land (annual rent = full value of land
X rate of return). If the EF is 40 percent, the right-of-way facility
(and its operation) is only partially encumbering the right-of-way area
so that other uses could co-exist alongside the right-of-way facility.
The land use rent for such a facility would be calculated on only 40
percent of the full value of the subject land (annual rent = full value
of land x 40 percent x rate of return).
Two comments received on the ANPR on this topic suggested that an
EF could be as low as 10-15 percent if the right-of-way facility is
located on undevelopable terrain; a 25 percent EF be used for a
transmission line that does not affect development of land (``set-back
areas''); a 50 percent EF be used if development is restricted, but not
prohibited, or if other land uses are still possible; and a 70 percent
EF be used if development or other uses are severely restricted.
Another ANPR commenter stated that the EF should be lowered to 25-50
percent for power lines, because in the private sector, an electrical
utility typically makes a one-time payment of 50 percent fair market
land value for a perpetual easement, allowing other use(s) within the
corridor as long as the use(s) do not interfere with the power line.
The commenter also stated that most of the uses that the BLM authorizes
can also be conducted within a power line corridor without interfering
with the power line and without restricting the additional use. One
ANPR commenter encouraged the BLM to use a lower EF than 70 percent,
based on common real estate practice relating to utility easements. The
commenter stated that when utilities negotiate the purchase price for
easements on private land, they typically apply a factor of 50 percent
or less to the fee simple value of the land involved, to reflect that
the utility easement is less than fee ownership and has a reduced
impact. This commenter further stated that the BLM should use a 50
percent or lower encumbrance (impact adjustment) factor and should
allow a right-of-way applicant to demonstrate that an even lower impact
factor should apply.
In preparing the proposed rule, the BLM reviewed several appraisal
reports (prepared by the DOI's Appraisal Services Directorate) for
right-of-way facilities located on Federal lands. These appraisal
reports showed an EF ranging from 25 percent (for buried telephone
lines) to 100 percent (for major oil pipelines and electrical
transmission lines). The BLM also reviewed one appraisal report that
was prepared by a contractor for the BLM. The contractor did an
independent solicitation of industry practices regarding this factor
and again found anecdotal evidence that EFs vary from 25 percent to 100
percent, with 50 to 75 percent being the most common. One holder
provided anecdotal evidence that its company typically used a 40
percent EF for buried facilities and a 60 percent EF for above ground
facilities when negotiating land use rental terms for its facilities
across private lands. One BLM grant-holder contracted with a private
appraisal firm to determine an appropriate EF for a major pipeline and
found that a 75 percent EF is fairly typical for major projects.
Finally, our review showed that many state and Federal agencies have
established an EF by statute or by policy, usually in the 70 percent to
100 percent range. In the proposed rule, the BLM specifically asked for
comments regarding the proposed use of a 50 percent EF, especially
since this was a reduction from the 80 percent and 70 percent EFs used
in the previous per acre rent schedule.
We received many comments on the proposed rule supporting the
reduction of the EF to 50 percent from the 80 percent and 70 percent in
the previous per acre rent schedule. A few commenters specifically
stated that the EF should be limited in all cases to no higher than 50
percent. One commenter stated that the BLM has traditionally appraised
the acquisition of non-exclusive road easements (the equivalent of a
BLM right-of-way) using a 50 percent encumbrance factor and that a
maximum 50 percent EF should be used whether or not the EF is applied
to the upper limit of each zone value or the mid-point value of each
zone. One commenter suggested that the EF should be reduced to as
little as 10 percent, arguing that a transmission facility located on
public lands devalues the land much less than would an easement on
private land and that the rights obtained under a grant are also less
than those obtained under an easement. Another commenter, while
supporting an EF of 50 percent, believed that the final rule should
provide holders the option to seek lower EFs via an appraisal. In
addition, one commenter suggested that the EF be reduced below 50
percent in those cases where a new right-of-way is granted within an
existing road right-of-way or patent reservation for roads or utility
purposes.
The BLM agrees with the commenters that state that there are
situations and circumstances where an EF of less than 50 percent may be
appropriate, whether due to the type of facility, the rights obtained
or granted, the impact of the facility on the land, or the co-location
of multiple facilities within the same utility corridor. However, there
is convincing evidence of situations where an EF greater than 50
percent is warranted. In fact, for large right-of-way facilities, such
as interstate pipelines and electrical transmission lines greater than
138 kilovolts in size, the annual rent or one-time easement payment is
typically determined using 100 percent of the land value (100 percent
EF). These major right-of-way facilities not only encumber the greatest
number of acres, but can have significant and continuing impacts on
public land resources, including impacts to visual, open space,
wildlife, vegetative, cultural, recreation, and other public land
resources. In addition to the documented cases cited above supporting
EFs greater than 50 percent, two articles published in a professional
right-of-way journal also show that a 50
[[Page 65048]]
percent EF is indicative of a balanced-use by both the land owner and
right-of-way/easement holder (see Donald Sherwood, Easement Valuation,
Right-of-Way Magazine, May/June 2006 at 33). More telling are several
quotes from utility company officials stating that the typical amount
of compensation for permanent easements is 50 percent of the underlying
land value, but that this amount can increase up to 100 percent
depending on the size of the transmission line or right-of-way facility
being sited (see William R. Lang and Brett A. Smith, Valuing a Gas
Pipeline Easement, Right-of-Way Magazine, September/October 1998 at
32). The BLM recognizes that the EF is closely related to the type of
right-of-way facility authorized, as well as how it is operated and
administered. However, to assign a specific EF for each type of
facility, or type of terrain, or to allow the holder the option of
completing an appraisal that may establish a lower EF would be counter-
productive to the purpose of using a schedule in the first place, i.e.,
administrative simplicity and the cost savings that a schedule provides
to both the BLM and the applicant/holder in determining rent for right-
of-way facilities on public lands. (We note that under this final rule
the holder has the option to complete an appraisal report to determine
one-time rent for perpetual grants or easements under sections 2806.25,
2806.26, and 2885.22. In these cases, involving lands to be transferred
out of Federal ownership, the appraisal report could establish an EF
lower than 50 percent (see section 2806.25(d)). In determining an
appropriate EF for the final rule, the BLM has also given consideration
to the fact that the BLM grants rights-of-way for a specified term,
usually 20 to 30 years and that the rights granted are subject to
renewal, relinquishment, abandonment, termination, or modification
during the term of the grant. We also recognize that the grants issued
for right-of-way facilities are non-exclusive, i.e., the BLM reserves
the right to authorize other uses within a right-of-way area, as long
as the uses are compatible. Given these considerations, and the
research and analysis cited above, along with consideration of public
comments and published information, the BLM has determined that a 50
percent EF is a reasonable and appropriate component for use in the
rent formula for linear right-of-way facilities located on public
lands.
Rate of Return
The rate of return component used in the Per Acre Rent Schedule
reflects the relationship of income to property value, as modified by
any adjustments to property value, such as the EF discussed above. The
BLM reviewed a number of appraisal reports that indicated that the rate
of return for land can vary from 7 to 12 percent, and is typically
around 10 percent. These rates take into account certain risk
considerations, i.e., the possibility of not receiving or losing future
income benefits, and do not normally include an allowance for
inflation. However, a holder seeking a right-of-way from the BLM must
show that it is financially able to construct and operate the facility.
In addition, the BLM can require surety or performance bonds from the
holder to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the
authorization, including any rental obligations. This reduces the risk
and should allow the BLM to use a ``safe rate of return'' e.g., the
prevailing rate on insured savings accounts or guaranteed government
securities that include an allowance for inflation.
The rate of return for the previous rent schedule was 6.41 percent,
which was the 1-year Treasury Securities ``Constant Maturity'' rate for
June 30, 1986. In response to the ANPR, two commenters stated that this
rate of return is an acceptable rate of return for right-of-way uses on
public lands. Another ANPR commenter stated that the Treasury-bill (T-
bill) rate of 6.41 percent in the current rent schedule is not
unreasonably high given current T-bill rates around 5 percent. This
commenter also stated that an annual adjustment of the T-bill rate
would lead to uncertainty in rental fees, which would have a negative
impact on utilities and customers, and duplicates the changes reflected
in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) index. Land values tend to move
opposite to the T-bill rate, the commenter noted, so including this
update in the formula would lead to overly-large rental rates.
According to this commenter, a better approach would be to use the 10-
year average of the 1-year T-bill rates. Three commenters supported
updating the rate of return annually, using some multi-year average of
the 1-year T-bill rates. The ANPR commenters said that this approach
would provide for a current rate of return, while avoiding abrupt
changes.
Given the above considerations, the BLM proposed that an initial
rate of return based on the 10-year average (1992-2001) of the U.S. 30-
year Treasury bond yield rate would be reasonable since most right-of-
way authorizations are issued for a term of 30 years. The BLM chose the
10-year period from 1992-2001 since it was the 10-year period
immediately preceding the establishment of the 2002 base rent schedule.
The ``initial'' rate in the proposed rule (6.47 percent) would have
been effective through 2011, and then would have adjusted automatically
to the then-existing 10-year average (2002-2011) of the U.S. 30-year
Treasury bond yield rate. This method of establishing the rate of
return eliminates a ``one-point-in-time'' high or low rate with a rate
that reflects an average over the preceding decade. The proposed rule
would have allowed for use of the 10-year average of the U.S. 20-year
Treasury bond yield rate if the 30-year U.S. Treasury bond yield rate
were not available. In the proposed rule, the BLM specifically asked
for comment regarding the method that we proposed to establish the
initial rate of return and how we proposed to update it every ten
years.
We received several comments in support of the proposed 6.47
percent rate of return and the use of the 10-year average of the U.S.
30-year Treasury bond yield rate to establish the initial rate of
return. However, two commenters suggested using more current rates: One
recommended using the one-year Treasury bill rate, while the other
recommended using the most current 30-year Treasury bond yield. The BLM
agrees that we should use the most current rates, so that the rate of
return reflects the most recent value of money, but a 10-year average
is more appropriate than a rate selected from one point in time. As a
result, in the final rule, the BLM revised the rate of return downward
from 6.47 percent (the 10-year average from 1992 to 2001 of the 30-year
Treasury bond yield) to 5.27 percent, which is the most current 10-year
average (1998-2008) of the 30-year and 20-year Treasury bond yield
rate.
The BLM also agrees with the commenter who stated that a periodic
adjustment of the T-bill rate, as proposed in section 2806.22(c), would
lead to uncertainty in rental fees, which would have a negative impact
on utilities and customers and duplicate the changes reflected in the
GDP index. The commenter stated that land values tend to move in
opposite directions to the T-bill rate, so including this variable in
the formula could lead to overly-large rental rate increases when
compared to other economic forces, instead of reflecting current land
values as directed by the Act. The BLM agrees and since the rate of
return is established by this rule, we will not adjust the 5.27 percent
rate of return in the final rule except through new rulemaking.
[[Page 65049]]
2002 (Base Year) Per Acre Rent Schedule
Based upon the above discussion establishing the final per acre
zone values, encumbrance factor, and rate of return, the Per Acre Rent
Schedule for the base year, calendar year 2002, is shown in Table 4:
Table 4--2002 Per Acre Rent Schedule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per acre rent for
all types of
linear right-of-
way facilities
issued under
Encumbrance Rate of return either FLPMA or
County zone number and per acre zone value factor (percent) (percent) MLA or their
predecessors. To
be adjusted
annually for
changes in the
IPD-GDP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zone 1 $250............................................ 50 5.27 $6.59
Zone 2 $500............................................ 50 5.27 13.18
Zone 3 $1,000.......................................... 50 5.27 26.35
Zone 4 $1,500.......................................... 50 5.27 39.53
Zone 5 $2,000.......................................... 50 5.27 52.70
Zone 6 $3,000.......................................... 50 5.27 79.05
Zone 7 $5,000.......................................... 50 5.27 131.75
Zone 8 $10,000......................................... 50 5.27 263.50
Zone 9 $20,000......................................... 50 5.27 527.00
Zone 10 $30,000........................................ 50 5.27 790.50
Zone 11 $50,000........................................ 50 5.27 1,317.50
Zone 12 $100,000....................................... 50 5.27 2,635.00
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above, the most recent NASS Census data available is
for calendar year 2002 and those data, in conjunction with the final
per acre zone values, encumbrance factor, and rate of return, are used
to develop the initial or base Per Acre Rent Schedule. In summary,
final section 2806.20 explains that the base 2002 Per Acre Rent
Schedule will be adjusted annually in accordance with section
2806.22(a) and revised at the end of each 10-year period (starting with
the base year of 2002) in accordance with section 2806.22(b). These
adjustments to the 2002 Per Acre Rent Schedule, as well as the Per Acre
Rent Schedule for calendar years 2008 through 2015, are discussed
below.
Section 2806.20 further explains that counties (or other
geographical areas) would be assigned toan appropriate zone under
section 2806.21. The reference to proposed section 2806.22(c) has been
removed from final section 2806.20 because proposed section 2806.22(c)
has not been adopted in the final rule. Proposed section 2806.22(c)
allowed for the rate of return to be adjusted at the end of each 10-
year period. In the final rule, the rate of return will remain at 5.27
percent unless revised through new rulemaking. The reasons for this
change are provided in the ``Rate of Return'' section above, as well as
in final section 2806.22 below.
Finally, section 2806.20 explains that you may obtain a copy of the
current Per Acre Rent Schedule from any BLM state or field office or by
writing: Director, BLM, 1849 C St., NW., Mail Stop 1000 LS, Washington,
DC 20240. The BLM also posts the current rent schedule on the BLM
Homepage on the Internet at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.blm.gov. Because current
schedules are easily available, the BLM does not intend to publish an
updated Per Acre Rent Schedule each year in the Federal Register.
Section 2806.21 When and how are counties or other geographical areas
assigned to a County Zone Number and Per Acre Zone Value?
This section explains that counties (or other geographical areas)
are assigned a county zone number and per acre zone value in the Per
Acre Rent Schedule based upon 80 percent of their per acre land and
building value published in the Census of Agriculture by the NASS (see
discussion above regarding this 80 percent figure). The initial
assignment of counties to the zones will cover years 2006 through 2010
of the Per Acre Rent Schedule and is based on data contained in the
most recent NASS Census (2002). We use the year 2006 as the initial
year for the assignment of counties because it takes 18 months for the
NASS to compile and publish Census data, and in the final rule we
provide 18 months of advanced notice prior to any possible re-
assignment of counties using new NASS Census data (for a total of 3
years). Therefore, the initial assignment of counties based on the 2002
NASS Census data could not have occurred until 2006. For example, San
Juan County, New Mexico, has a 2002 NASS Census per acre land and
building value of $324. Since 80 percent of this amount ($259) falls
between $251 and $500, San Juan County is assigned to Zone 2 on the Per
Acre Rent Schedule for the 5-year time period from 2006 through 2010.
This section also explains that subsequent re-assignments of counties
are possible every 5 years (2011, 2016, 2021, 2026, and so forth)
following the publication of the NASS Census.
As discussed previously, we received many comments requesting a
reduction in the NASS Census per acre land and building value. However,
several commenters also stated that the re-assignment of counties each
five-year period with less than one year's notice would expose utility
and pipeline companies to frequent and potentially unpredictable fee
adjustments. Other commenters stated that utility companies needed more
advance notice of any re-assignment of counties to new zones on the
rent schedule than the proposed rule allowed (less than one year) to
allow adequate planning, budgeting, and recovery of costs associated
with potentially large fee increases. The BLM agrees with the
commenters that it is reasonable to allow additional time between the
publication of the NASS Census data and any re-assignment of counties
to their proper rental zones to allow companies to adjust budgets and
recover
[[Page 65050]]
costs associated with the increases. We considered several time periods
(from 1 to 5 additional years) and concluded that 1 additional year is
sufficient advance notice to plan, budget, and recover any additional
costs associated with the re-assignment of counties. As a result, we
used the year 2006 as the initial year for the assignment of counties
based on the 2002 NASS Census data (see above discussion). Likewise,
the next scheduled NASS Census will be for calendar year 2007, but the
data will not be published until approximately June 2009. Any re-
assignment of the counties under the proposed rule would have occurred
in rental year 2010. However, in the final rule, the re-assignment of
counties will occur in year 2011, providing a full 18 months of notice
as compared to only 6 months of advance notice under the proposed rule.
For example, if 80 percent of the average per acre land and building
value of San Juan County stays between $251 and $500 in the 2007 NASS
Census, San Juan County would remain in Zone 2 on the Per Acre Rent
Schedule for calendar years 2011 through 2015. However, if 80 percent
of the average per acre land and building value were to drop to $240,
San Juan County would be re-assigned to Zone 1 on the Per Acre Rent
Schedule for calendar years 2011 through 2015, instead of calendar
years 2010 through 2014, as proposed. Likewise, if 80 percent of the
average per acre land and building value were to increase to $640, San
Juan County would be re-assigned to Zone 3 on the Per Acre Rent
Schedule for calendar years 2011 through 2015.
In summary, we revised proposed section 2806.21 in the final rule
to account for the assignment of counties into the zones on the linear
rent schedule based on 80 percent of the average per acre land and
building value contained in the NASS Census, instead of 100 percent. In
addition, the re-assignment of counties to the zones in the per acre
rent schedule has been delayed by one year (as discussed above) to
provide adequate time for holders to budget and recover any additional
costs that may result from being placed into a higher zone based upon
new NASS Census data each five-year period.
The adjusted 2002 NASS Census per acre land and building value for
each county and the corresponding zone number in the Per Acre Rent
Schedule (based on 80 percent of the NASS Census data) are listed for
informational purposes at the end of this final rule.
Section 2806.22 When and how does the Per Acre Rent Schedule change?
This section explains that the BLM will adjust the per acre rent in
section 2806.20 for all types of linear right-of-way facilities in each
zone each calendar year based on the average annual change in the
Implicit Price Deflator-Gross Domestic Product (IPD-GDP) for the 10-
year period immediately preceding the year that the NASS Census data
becomes available. For example, the average annual change in the IPD-
GDP from 1994 to 2003 (the 10-year period immediately preceding the
year (2004) that the 2002 NASS Census data became available) is 1.9
percent. This annual adjustment factor is applied to years 2006 through
2015 of the Per Acre Rent Schedule to coincide with the time periods
that counties are assigned a county zone number and per acre zone value
in the Per Acre Rent Schedule based first on the 2002 NASS Census data
(2006-2010) and secondly, on the 2007 NASS Census data (2011-2015).
Likewise, the average annual change in the IPD-GDP from 2004 to 2013
(the 10-year period immediately preceding the year (2014) when the 2012
NASS Census data will become available) will be applied to years 2016
through 2025 of the Per Acre Rent Schedule. The annual price index
component used in the Per Acre Rent Schedule allows the rent per acre
amount to stay current with inflationary or deflationary trends. If the
rent schedule were not based on the ``zone'' concept, where county per
acre land values were placed into a corresponding zone value, the price
index adjustment would not be necessary, assuming the county per acre
land values were kept current. However, since the Act directs the BLM
to ``revise the per acre rental fee zone value schedule by state,
county, and type of linear right-of-way use to reflect current values
of land in each zone,'' the final rule retains the zone concept as well
as the annual price index adjustment.
The previous Per Acre Rent Schedule was adjusted annually by the
change in the IPD-GDP index from the second quarter to the second
quarter. From the initial rent schedule in 1987 to the rent schedule
for 2007, the change in the IPD-GDP index increased the rent per acre
amounts by 62.2 percent. In comparison, the Consumer Price Index--for
all Urban Consumers (CPI-U) index increased 85.8 percent for the same
period. Because the growth rate for the IPD-GDP is generally less than
that for the CPI-U, one ANPR commenter suggested using half of the CPI-
U index rather than the current 100 percent of the IPD-GDP as the CPI-U
is more easily available. The commenter said that halving the CPI-U
number is in line with the lesser IPD-GDP and allows for a
normalization of the annual index adjustment while still allowing for
increases with inflation.
Two ANPR commenters stated that the payment due date (January 1)
comes less than one month after the payment amount is announced in
December. The commenters recommended using an earlier-published index
than the current one (July of each year). Another ANPR commenter stated
that the IPD-GDP is reported as a national number only and does not
reflect any potential regional changes in the price level.
In the proposed rule, we chose the CPI-U because it is one of the
most common indexes used by economists and the Federal Government to
reflect inflationary and deflationary trends in the economy as a whole.
It is also one of the most recognizable and familiar indexes to the
American consumer and it can be easily obtained from published sources
by both Federal agencies and the American public.
The BLM received several comments on the proposed use of the CPI-U
index instead of the IPD-GDP. Nearly all commenters on the proposed
rule supported the continued use of the IPD-GDP instead of the CPI-U
index. Two commenters stated that the CPI-U only measures inflation
felt by consumers and does not include price inflation for other parts
of the economy. The commenters stated that the IPD-GDP reflects a much
broader range of inflation and is more appropriate to track increases
in land values. In addition, several commenters stated that holders
whose rental obligations exceed several million dollars annually must
have more advance notice (or predictability) of their obligations for
proper planning, budgeting, and recovery of these fees.
The BLM made two changes in the annual index adjustment factor from
the proposed rule to the final rule. First, we changed the annual index
adjustment factor from the CPI-U to the IPD-GDP because we agree with
some of the commenters that the IPD-GDP index tracks increases in land
values as well as, if not better than, the CPI-U. For example, in the
last 5 years when land values have risen nearly 80 percent nationally,
the IPD-GDP (which normally lags behind the CPI-U) has increased
slightly more than the CPI-U (14 percent to 13.6 percent,
respectively). In addition, the IPD-GDP tracks a broader range of
economic indicators than does the CPI-U, and is just as easy to track
on an annual basis as the CPI-U. Secondly, in order to
[[Page 65051]]
provide the predictability requested by several commenters (and which
the BLM agrees is necessary), we changed how the annual index factor is
calculated and how it is applied in the final rent schedule. In the
final rule the annual index adjustment is based on the average annual
change in the IPD-GDP for the 10-year period immediately preceding the
year (2004) that the 2002 NASS Census data became available (or 1.9
percent). This figure (1.9 percent) can then be applied for calendar
years 2006 through 2015 to provide the predictability in the rent
schedule requested by many of the commenters. The BLM will recalculate
the annual index adjustment in 2014 based on the average annual change
in the IPD-GDP from 2004 to 2013 (the 10-year period immediately
preceding the year (2014) when the 2012 NASS Census data will become
available) and will apply it to years 2016 through 2025 of the Per Acre
Rent Schedule to provide the predictability requested by many of the
commenters. In summary, these changes provide the predictability
advocated by several commenters and uses an index that better reflects
changing land values and other broad indicators of economic trends.
Table 5 shows how the IPD-GDP index has been applied to the 2002
``Base Year'' rent schedule (see Table 4) and subsequent years through
2007 to arrive at the final Per Acre Rent Schedules for years 2008
through 2015 (see Table 6). Table 5 is included here only to show how
the final Per Acre Rent Schedule (Table 6) was developed. The BLM will
not use the per acre rent values shown in Table 5 for any rent
calculation purposes. (Rent paid for years 2002-2007 under the previous
schedule would not be recalculated using the rates in Table 5).
Table 5--2002-2007 Per Acre Rent Schedules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003 per acre 2004 per acre 2005 per acre
rent (2.1 rent (2.9 rent (3.2 2006 * per acre 2007 per acre
2002 per acre percent IPD- percent IPD- percent IPD- rent (1.9 percent rent (1.9 percent
County zone number and per acre zone value rent (base GDP increase GDP increase GDP increase IPD-GDP increase-- IPD-GDP increase--
year) from preceding from preceding from preceding average annual average annual
year) year) year) increase from increase from
1994-2003) 1994-2003)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zone 1 $250....................................... $6.59 $6.73 $6.92 $7.14 $7.28 $7.42
Zone 2 $500....................................... 13.18 13.45 13.84 14.28 14.56 14.83
Zone 3 $1,000..................................... 26.35 26.90 27.68 28.57 29.11 29.67
Zone 4 $1,500..................................... 39.53 40.36 41.53 42.85 43.67 44.50
Zone 5 $2,000..................................... 52.70 53.81 55.37 57.14 58.22 59.33
Zone 6 $3,000..................................... 79.05 80.71 83.05 85.71 87.34 89.00
Zone 7 $5,000..................................... 131.75 134.52 138.42 142.85 145.56 148.33
Zone 8 $10,000.................................... 263.50 269.03 276.84 285.69 291.12 296.65
Zone 9 $20,000.................................... 527.00 538.07 553.67 571.39 582.24 593.31
Zone 10 $30,000................................... 790.50 807.10 830.51 857.08 873.37 889.96
Zone 11 $50,000................................... 1,317.50 1,345.17 1,384.18 1,428.47 1,455.61 1,483.27
Zone 12 $100,000.................................. 2,635.00 2,690.34 2,768.35 2,856.94 2,911.22 2,966.54
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Counties are assigned to appropriate zones for calendar years 2006-2010 based upon 2002 NASS Census Data (80% of average per acre land and building
value).
We use 2002 as the base year, or beginning point, for the final
rent schedule because the most recent NASS Census data is for 2002. The
annual index adjustment for calendar years 2003 through 2005 is based
on the previous year's change in the IPD-GDP, i.e., 2.1 percent, 2.9
percent, and 3.2 percent, respectively. However, in order to provide
the predictability suggested by some commenters and as explained above,
the annual index adjustment for calendar years 2006 through 2015 is
based on the average annual change in the IPD-GDP for the 10-year
period immediately preceding the year (2004) that the 2002 NASS Census
data became available, or 1.9 percent. We can therefore extend the Per
Acre Rent Schedule into the future through calendar year 2015 as shown
in Table 6.
Table 6--2008-2015 Per Acre Rent Schedules
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 * per acre 2009 per acre 2010 per acre 2011 ** per acre 2012 per acre 2013 per acre 2014 per acre 2015 per acre
rent (1.9 percent rent (1.9 percent rent (1.9 percent rent (1.9 percent rent (1.9 percent rent (1.9 percent rent (1.9 percent rent (1.9 percent
County zone number and per acre zone IPD-GDP increase-- IPD-GDP increase-- IPD-GDP increase-- IPD-GDP increase-- IPD-GDP increase-- IPD-GDP increase-- IPD-GDP increase-- IPD-GDP increase--
value average annual average annual average annual average annual average annual average annual average annual average annual
increase from increase from increase from increase from increase from increase from increase from increase from
1994-2003) 1994-2003) 1994-2003) 1994-2003) 1994-2003) 1994-2003) 1994-2003) 1994-2003)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zone 1 $250............................. $7.56 $7.70 $7.85 $8.00 $8.15 $8.30 $8.46 $8.62
Zone 2 $500............................. 15.11 15.40 15.69 15.99 16.30 16.61 16.92 17.24
Zone 3 $1,000........................... 30.23 30.80 31.39 31.99 32.59 33.21 33.84 34.49
Zone 4 $1,500........................... 45.34 46.21 47.08 47.98 48.89 49.82 50.76 51.73
Zone 5 $2,000........................... 60.46 61.61 62.78 63.97 65.19 66.42 67.69 68.97
Zone 6 $3,000........................... 90.69 92.41 94.17 95.96 97.78 99.64 101.53 103.46
Zone 7 $5,000........................... 151.15 154.02 156.94 159.93 162.96 166.06 169.22 172.43
Zone 8 $10,000.......................... 302.29 308.03 313.89 319.85 325.93 332.12 338.43 344.86
Zone 9 $20,000.......................... 604.58 616.07 627.77 639.70 651.85 664.24 676.86 689.72
Zone 10 $30,000......................... 906.87 924.10 941.66 959.55 977.78 996.36 1,015.29 1,034.58
[[Page 65052]]
Zone 11 $50,000......................... 1,511.45 1,540.17 1,569.43 1,599.25 1,629.64 1,660.60 1,692.15 1,724.30
Zone 12 $100,000........................ 3,022.90 3,080.34 3,138.86 3,198.50 3,259.27 3,321.20 3,384.30 3,448.60
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Counties are assigned to appropriate zones for calendar years 2008-2010 based upon 2002 NASS Census Data (80% of average per acre land and building value).
** Counties are re-assigned to appropriate zones for calendar years 2011-2015 based on 2007 NASS Census Data (80% of average per acre land and building value).
The annual index adjustment will then be recalculated in 2014 and
each subsequent 10-year period based on the average annual change in
the IPD-GDP for the 10-year period immediately preceding the year
(2014, 2024, 2034, etc.) when the NASS Census data becomes available.
For example, the annual index adjustment will next be recalculated in
2014 (when the 2012 NASS Census data becomes available) based on the
average annual change in the IPD-GDP from 2004 to 2013 (the 10-year
period immediately preceding the year (2014) when the 2012 NASS Census
data becomes available) and will be applied annually to the Per Acre
Rent Schedules for calendar years 2016 through 2025. In the event that
the NASS Census stops being published, or is otherwise unavailable,
then the only changes to the rent schedule will be the annual index
adjustment (see section 2806.22(a)) until a new rent schedule is
developed through rulemaking.
Section 2806.22 also explains that the BLM would review the NASS
Census data from the 2012 NASS Census, and each subsequent 10-year
period, and if appropriate, revise the number of county zones and the
per acre zone value. Any revision must include 100 percent of the
number of counties and listed geographical areas for all states and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and must reasonably reflect their average
per acre land and building values (less the 20 percent reduction)
contained in the NASS Census. The BLM may revise the number of zones
and the per acre zone value in the 2002 base Per Acre Rent Schedule
(section 2806.20(a)) following the publication of the 2012 NASS Census.
Since the 2012 NASS Census data will not be available until early to
mid 2014, based on current timeframes, any revision would be applicable
to the calendar year 2016 rent schedule. Although the NASS Census
occurs at 5-year intervals, the revision of the number of zones and the
per acre zone value will occur each 10-year period after publication of
the NASS Census data in 2012, 2022, 2032, and so forth. Based on
historic trends in average per acre land values, the BLM does not
foresee that it would be necessary to revise the Per Acre Rent Schedule
after each NASS Census period. The BLM finds, however, that it would
likely be necessary to revise the Per Acre Rent Schedule after every
other NASS Census period (each 10-year period) in order to keep the
schedule current with existing per acre land values.
The one-year delay (2016) in implementing the revised rent schedule
based on data from the 2012 NASS Census is a change from the proposed
rule, which stated that the revised schedule would be effective in
calendar year 2015. We revised the final rule to provide holders with
more notice and time to plan, budget, and recover potentially
significant rent increases resulting from the revisions to the rent
schedule at 10-year intervals. The one-year delay to 2016 in
implementing the revised rent schedule based on data from the 2012 NASS
Census is also consistent with the one-year delay in the reassignment
of counties potentially made each 5 years after the availability of the
NASS Census data. The re-assignment of counties will be effective for
calendar years 2011, 2016, 2021, 2026, and so forth (see the discussion
for section 2806.21).
We also revised final section 2806.22 by deleting proposed
paragraph (c) which would have adjusted the rate of return after each
10-year period. We removed this provision based on the need (as
expressed by several commenters) to provide greater predictability of
future rental amounts and to ensure that future adjustments are
primarily based on changes in land values and not other economic
factors (see the discussion under ``Rate of Return'').
The adjustments provided by this section will keep the Per Acre
Rent Schedule current relative to average per acre land value as
directed by the Act. In addition, since the adjustments provide one
additional year of advance notice on county re-assignments (each 5-year
period), and one additional year of advance notice on the revision of
the number of zones and zone values (each 10-year period), the changes
should not be either burdensome to administer or surprising in their
outcome.
Section 2806.23 How will BLM calculate my rent for linear rights-of-way
the Per Acre Rent Schedule covers?
Final section 2806.23(a) explains that (except as provided by
sections 2806.25 and 2806.26) the BLM calculates rent by multiplying
the rent per acre for the appropriate county (or other geographical
area) zone from the current schedule by the number of acres (as rounded
up to the nearest tenth of an acre) in the right-of-way area that fall
in each zone and multiplying the result by the number of years in the
rental payment period. The final rent calculation methodology is
identical to the proposed methodology except for changing the phrase
``rental period'' to ``rental payment period'' (the length of time for
which the holder is paying rent) to make the rule clearer. An example
explaining how the methodology will be applied follows: An existing
pipeline right-of-way in New Mexico occupies 0.74 acres of public land
in McKinley County and 4.8 acres of public land in San Juan County. The
2002 NASS Census indicates that the average per acre land and building
value for McKinley County is $75 (Zone 1 on the Per Acre Rent Schedule
($75 x .80 = $60)) and $324 for San Juan County (or Zone 2 ($324 x .80
= $259) on the Per Acre Rent Schedule). The per acre rent value for
calendar year 2008 for Zone 1 is $7.56 and for Zone 2 it is $15.11. The
2008 annual rent for the portion of the
[[Page 65053]]
right-of-way in Zone 1 (McKinley County) is $6.05 (0.74 acres (rounded
up to 0.8 acres) multiplied by $7.56 = $6.05). The 2008 annual rent for
the portion of the right-of-way in Zone 2 (San Juan County) is $72.53
(4.8 acres multiplied by $15.11 = $72.53). The total 2008 rent for the
entire grant would be $78.58. Regardless of whether the holder is an
individual or business entity, given that the annual rent is $100 or
less, the holder can only pay for the entire remaining term of the
grant, or pay rent at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the
grant (see section 2806.24).
Final section 2806.23(b) provides for the phase-in of the initial
implementation of the Per Acre Rent Schedule by reducing the 2009 per
acre rent by 25 percent. Lastly, this section explains that if the BLM
has not previously used the rent schedule to calculate your rent, we
may do so after giving you reasonable written notice.
We received two comments on this proposed section. Both commenters
suggested that we include the word ``payment'' when referring to the
``rental period'' in section 2806.23(a) so that the phrase reads
``rental payment period'' to denote the length of time for which the
holder is paying rent. The commenters stated that some holders may
confuse the phrase ``rental period'' to be the term of the grant
instead of the length of time for which the holder is paying rent. We
agree that this change improves clarity and have made this change in
the final rule.
We received no other comments on this section, but we did request
comments in the proposed rule at section 2885.20 on the need for a
phase-in provision for FLPMA and MLA grants. As a result of those
comments (see discussion for section 2885.20(b)), we have added final
section 2806.23(b) which provides for a phase-in of the initial
implementation of the Per Acre Rent Schedule by reducing the 2009 per
acre rent by 25 percent. In calendar year 2009, all holders will pay 75
percent of the scheduled rental rates, and thereafter, 100 percent of
the scheduled rental rates.
The BLM does not expect the rental increases to be financially
burdensome for most holders. We believe that several provisions added
to the final rule (an additional 1-year advance notice of potentially
large rental increases, reducing the NASS Census land and building
value for each county by 20 percent, reducing the rate of return by
18.5 percent (from 6.47 percent to 5.27 percent), reducing the
threshold from $1,000 to $500 for payment of annual rent instead of 10-
year rental payments, and waiving 25 percent of the calendar year 2009
rental rates for all authorization holders), in conjunction with the
more flexible rent payment options described in final sections 2806.24
and 2885.21, as well as the existing hardship provision found at
section 2806.15(c), will provide appropriate relief from any large,
unexpected increases in rent payments that are due to implementation of
the revised linear rent schedule.
Section 2806.24 How must I make rental payments for a linear grant?
Final section 2806.24(a) explains that for linear grants, except
those issued in perpetuity, you must make either nonrefundable annual
payments or a nonrefundable payment for more than 1 year, as follows:
(1) One-time payments. You may pay in advance the total rent amount
for the entire term of the grant or any remaining years.
(2) Multiple payments. If you choose not to make a one-time
payment, you must pay according to one of the following methods:
(i) Payments by individuals. If your annual rent is $100 or less,
you must pay at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant.
If your annual rent is greater than $100, you may pay annually or at
10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant. For example, if
you have a grant with a term of 30 years, you may pay in advance for 10
years, 20 years, or 30 years, but not 15 years.
(ii) Payments by all others. If your annual rent is $500 or less,
you must pay rent at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the
grant. If your annual rent is greater than $500, you may pay annually
or at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant.
Final section 2806.24(a) replaces the rent payment options in
previous section 2806.23(a). Previously, only individual grant-holders
with annual rent in excess of $100 had the option to pay their rent
annually or at multi-year intervals of their choice. All other grant
holders had to pay a one-time rent payment for the term of the grant or
pay rent at 10-year intervals not to exceed the term of the grant.
These provisions were incorporated in the 2005 regulations to help
reduce or eliminate costs associated with the billing and collection of
annual rent to both the BLM and the holder. However, many holders
pointed out that making rent payments, especially for existing grants,
for 10- to 30-year terms (100 years for grants issued in perpetuity)
can be an extreme financial hardship, especially for small business
entities operating on limited annual budgets.
For FLPMA authorizations, the BLM has some ability to address these
issues under the ``undue hardship'' provisions in current section
2806.15(c), but this process can be burdensome on the holders, requires
approval of the appropriate BLM State Director, and is not available to
holders of MLA authorizations. Several holders of MLA authorizations
pointed out that the annual rent payment for some of their grants
exceed $10,000, and in at least one case, the annual rent is in excess
of $100,000, which would have required them to make minimum rent
payments between $100,000 and $1,000,000 for a 10-year rental payment
period. These holders have suggested that corporations and business
entities be given rent payment options similar to those of individuals,
except with a higher annual rental threshold of $500 or $1,000, instead
of the $100 threshold available to individual holders.
Three commenters on the ANPR said they supported flexible term-
payment schedules (annual payments, 5-year payments, 10-year payments)
for all authorizations, especially those with annual rent greater than
$500. Several commenters said that the BLM should include a 3- to 6-
year phase-in period, along with more flexible rent payment periods, in
order to provide relief from a large or unexpected increase in
individual rental payments. One commenter on the proposed rule
supported the rent payment periods as proposed, while one commenter
said that the $1,000 threshold is too high and should be set no higher
than $500. The commenter stated that there are more and more ``other
than individuals'' entities that are very small operations for which
the proposed regulations can cause a financial hardship. The BLM agrees
that the $1,000 threshold may be excessive for some small business
holders who would have to pay nearly $10,000 (for a 10-year period) if
their annual bill were just less than $1,000. By reducing the threshold
to $500, the maximum 10-year bill would be $4,990, an amount that may
cause less financial hardship to small business operators. Therefore,
in the final rule the $1,000 threshold for payment of annual rent has
been reduced to $500. This change should have positive impacts to small
businesses that may not have the necessary capital to make long-term
rental payments.
In summary, under final section 2806.24(a), the holder retains the
option to pay rent for the entire term of the grant, except for grants
issued in perpetuity. No changes in rent payment
[[Page 65054]]
options are made for those holders who are considered ``individuals''
with the exception that if the annual rent is greater than $100, you
may pay annually or at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the
grant. The final rule eliminates the option for individuals with annual
rent greater than $100 to pay at multiple-year intervals of their
choice. An ``individual'' does not include any business entity, e.g.,
partnerships, corporations, associations, or any similar business
arrangements. However, the BLM agrees that ``non-individuals'' need to
have more flexible rent payment options, especially those holders whose
annual rent payment is in excess of $500. Under the final rule, when
this threshold is met, the holder (non-individual) has the option to
pay its rent on an annual basis, or at 10-year intervals, not to exceed
the term of the grant. For example, the holder of a 25-year grant (a
grant issued on May 25, 2005, for a 25-year period would expire on
December 31, 2029) whose annual rent is $2,000 would have the option
upon grant issuance to make annual payments of $2,000 plus annual index
adjustments (the initial rent period would be for a 7-month period or a
rent payment of $1,166.67). The holder could also choose to make a
payment in advance for 10 years (total payment of $19,166.67 (9 years +
7 months); for 20 years (total payment of $39,166.67 (19 years + 7
months); or for the entire 25 years (total payment of $49,166.67 (24
years + 7 months), but not for any other multi-year period. If the
holder's annual rent is $500 or less, the holder (non-individual) must
pay rent at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant. If
rent is not paid for the full term, subsequent rental payments will be
based on the changes to the rental schedule as described in section
2806.21 (the re-assignment of counties each 5-year period) and section
2806.22 (the annual CPI-U index adjustment and/or the adjustment to the
number and value of rental zones each 10-year period), but the $100 and
$500 thresholds used to determine the eligibility for annual payments
by individuals and business entities, respectively, will not be
adjusted.
Final section 2806.24(b) explains that for linear grants issued in
perpetuity (except as noted in sections 2806.25 and 2806.26), you must
make either nonrefundable annual payments or a nonrefundable payment
for more than 1 year, as follows:
(1) Payments by individuals. If your annual rent is $100 or less,
you must pay at 10-year intervals, not to exceed 30 years. Under this
provision, you have the option to pay for a 10-year term, a 20-year
term, or a 30-year term. No other terms are available. If your annual
rent is greater than $100, you may pay annually or at 10-year intervals
(10-year term, 20-year term, or 30-year term), not to exceed 30 years.
Again, no other terms are available.
(2) Payments by all others. If your annual rent is $500 or less,
you must pay rent at 10-year intervals, not to exceed 30 years. Under
this section, you have the option to pay for a 10-year term, a 20-year
term, or a 30-year term. No other terms are available. If your annual
rent is greater than $500, you may pay annually or at 10-year intervals
(10-year term, 20-year term, or 30-year term), not to exceed 30 years.
No other terms are available.
Final section 2806.24(b) replaces previous section 2806.23(c),
which gave non-individual holders of a perpetual grant only one rent
payment option, that is, a one-time payment based on the annual rent
(either determined from the Per Acre Rent Schedule or from an
appraisal) multiplied by 100. Holders (non-individuals) of perpetual
grants had no other option under previous rules but to pay a one-time
payment that many found to be burdensome. Under the 1987 regulations
(43 CFR 2803.1-2(a)), holders of grants, including perpetual grants,
paid either annually or for a 5-year period, but could not make a one-
time payment. This was especially problematic when public land
encumbered by a perpetual grant was transferred out of Federal
ownership. The 2005 regulations provided for the one-time payment
option (see section 2806.23(c)), but did not offer other rent payment
options, which are necessary for proper administration of those
perpetual grants already in existence prior to 2005, and which encumber
land that the BLM intends to administer. Although the term of a FLPMA
grant can be any length, it is the BLM's policy to adhere strictly to
the factors listed in current section 2805.11(b) to establish a
reasonable term. The factors that must be considered in establishing a
reasonable term include the: (1) Public purpose served; (2) Cost and
useful life of the facility; (3) Time limitations imposed by licenses
or permits required by other Federal agencies and state, tribal, or
local governments; and (4) Time necessary to accomplish the purpose of
the grant. The BLM's own land use planning horizon is generally only 20
to 30 years, so it is seldom in the public interest to issue land use
authorizations which exceed this horizon. In addition, the term of MLA
grants cannot exceed 30 years (see current section 2885.11(a)).
Although the BLM now rarely issue grants in perpetuity, except when
the land encumbered by the grant is being transferred out of Federal
ownership (see final section 2806.25), we must still be able to
effectively administer grants that were issued in perpetuity under
prior authorities (generally pre-FLPMA authorities and the MLA prior to
1973). Holders of these grants have requested flexible rent payment
options. Final section 2806.24(b) provides rent payment options which
are deemed necessary for proper administration of perpetual grants when
the land is not being transferred out of Federal ownership. In
addition, final sections 2806.25 and 2806.26 allow you to make a one-
time payment for perpetual grants and perpetual easements,
respectively, when the land encumbered by the grant or easement is
being transferred out of Federal ownership.
We received two comments of support for the rent payment options in
proposed section 2806.24(b). However, a third commenter suggested that
holders of perpetual grants should always have the option to make a
one-time payment, even if the encumbered land is not being transferred
out of Federal ownership. The BLM disagrees with this suggestion
because a one-time rental payment for a perpetual grant is not
significantly greater (in some cases it could even be less) than a one-
time payment for a grant with a term of 30 years. Therefore, it is not
in the public's interest, in the case of Federally-owned land, to
forfeit possible future revenues for uses (the siting of right-of-way
facilities on public land) that may ultimately extend beyond a 30-year
time period. These subsequent rental receipts will far exceed the
administrative costs of issuing a new rental bill each 30-year period
and will continue to provide needed revenues to the U.S. Treasury, and
to state and local governments (who receive 50 percent of MLA rental
receipts). Final section 2806.24(b) is the same as proposed.
Final section 2806.24(c) is also the same as proposed section
2806.24(c) and previous section 2806.23(b), which explains that the BLM
considers the first partial calendar year in the initial rent payment
period to be the first year of the term. The BLM prorates the first
year rental amount based on the number of months left in the calendar
year after the effective date of the grant. We received no comments on
this section and it remains as proposed.
[[Page 65055]]
Section 2806.25 How may I make rental payments when land encumbered by
my perpetual linear grant (other than an easement issued under Sec.
2807.15(b)) is being transferred out of Federal ownership?
Final section 2806.25 explains how you may make one-time rental
payments for your perpetual linear grant (other than an easement issued
under section 2807.15(b) (see section 2806.26)) when land encumbered by
your grant is being transferred out of Federal ownership. Section
2806.25(a) explains that if you have an existing perpetual grant
(whether issued under FLPMA or its predecessors) and the land your
grant encumbers is being transferred out of Federal ownership, you may
make a one-time rental payment. You are not required to make a one-time
rental payment, but if you choose to do so, the BLM will determine your
one-time payment for a perpetual right-of-way grant by dividing the
current annual rent for the subject property by an overall
capitalization rate calculated from market data. Under this
calculation, the overall capitalization rate is the difference between
a market yield rate and a percent annual rent increase as described in
the formula below. The formula for this calculation is: One-time rental
payment = annual rent/(Y-CR), where:
(1) Annual rent = current annual rent applicable to the subject
property from the Per Acre Rent Schedule;
(2) Y = yield rate (rate of return) from the Per Acre Rent
Schedule (5.27 percent); and
(3) CR = annual percent change in rent as determined by the most
recent 10-year average of the difference in the IPD-GDP Index from
January of one year to January of the following year.
Section 2806.25(b) explains how you must make a one-time payment
for term grants converted to a perpetual grant under section
2807.15(b). If the land your grant encumbers is being transferred out
of Federal ownership and you request a conversion of your term grant to
a perpetual right-of-way grant, you will be required to make a one-time
rental payment in accordance with section 2806.25(a).
Section 2806.25(c) explains that in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this
section, the annual rent is determined from the Per Acre Rent Schedule
(see section 2806.20(c)) as updated under section 2806.22. However, the
per acre zone value and zone number used in this annual rental
determination will be based on the per acre zone value from acceptable
market information or an appraisal, if any, for the land transfer
action and not the county average per acre land and building value from
the NASS Census. This section also explains that you may submit an
appraisal report on your own initiative in accordance with paragraph
(d).
Section 2806.25(d) explains that when no acceptable market
information is available or when no appraisal has been completed for
the land transfer action or when the BLM requests it, you must prepare
an appraisal report in accordance with Federal appraisal standards.
Section 2806.25 is a new section that explains how one-time rental
payments will be determined for perpetual grants (other than an
easement issued under section 2807.15(b)) when the land your grant
encumbers is being transferred out of Federal ownership. It is
important to note that you are under no obligation to make a one-time
rental payment for your existing perpetual grant when the land your
grant encumbers is being transferred out of Federal ownership. If you
have an existing term or perpetual grant and you have made either
annual or multi-year payments under section 2806.24, and the land your
grant encumbers is to be transferred out of Federal ownership, and you
choose not to make a one-time rental payment to the BLM, you would
negotiate future rental payments for your grant with the new land owner
at the appropriate time. However, if you desire to make a one-time
payment to the BLM prior to the transfer of the land, and you have an
existing perpetual grant, section 2806.25(a) allows the BLM to
determine the one-time rental payment by dividing the current annual
rent for the subject property by an overall capitalization rate
calculated from market data. Under this calculation, the overall
capitalization rate is the difference between a market yield rate and a
percent annual rent increase as described in the formula below. The
formula for this calculation is: One-time rental payment = annual rent/
(Y-CR), where:
(1) Annual rent = current annual rent applicable to the subject
property from the Per Acre Rent Schedule;
(2) Y = yield rate (rate of return) from the Per Acre Rent
Schedule (5.27 percent); and
(3) CR = annual percent change in rent as determined by the most
recent 10-year average of the difference in the IPD-GDP Index from
January of one year to January of the following year.
For example, if the most recent 10-year average of the difference
in the IPD-GDP index from January of one year to January of the
following year is 1.27 percent, and since the rate of return is a
standard 5.27 percent, then the overall capitalization rate is 4.0
percent (5.27 - 1.27 = 4.0). The one-time rental payment for a
perpetual right-of-way grant with an annual rent of $36.63 would be
determined by dividing the annual rent ($36.63) by the overall
capitalization rate (.04), or $915.75. This methodology of calculating
rent is known as the income capitalization approach.
In the proposed rule, the BLM also considered other methods to
determine a one-time rental payment, including an administrative
approach similar to previous section 2806.23(c)(1), where a one-time
payment is determined by multiplying the annual rent by 100. Under this
approach, a one-time payment for the same right-of-way grant described
above with an annual rent payment of $36.63 would be $3,663 ($36.63
multiplied by 100), instead of $915.75. While this approach was
reasonable when using the previous per acre rent schedule, it would
have generated an excessively high one-time payment when using current
land values as directed by the Act. The BLM also considered using a
discounted cash flow (DCF) method to calculate the present value of the
projected annual rent payments over a 100-year term, assuming annual
rent payments are made in advance. The DCF approach would generate a
one-time payment similar to the income capitalization approach. In the
above example, a one-time rental payment using the DCF method for the
same annual rent payment figure of $36.63 would be $953.24 compared to
$915.75 using the income capitalization approach. In general, the DCF
formula is more complex and prone to rounding inconsistencies, as
compared to the income capitalization formula, which is fairly
straightforward and simple to use.
The BLM received only a few comments on proposed section
2806.25(a). Most commenters supported the income capitalization
approach to determine the one-time rent payment for perpetual grants as
reasonable. However, two commenters stated that the ``Income Approach''
for valuing land is not typically used or allowed under standard
appraisal practices. The BLM disagrees with the latter comments since
rental receipts for right-of-way uses (especially rental receipts that
are specifically based on rural land values as is the case of the Per
Acre Rent Schedule) are an acceptable indicator of land values under
Federal appraisal standards.
Given the above considerations, the BLM believes that the income
capitalization approach is the most reasonable methodology for
converting an annual rent payment (with an annual
[[Page 65056]]
adjustment factor) to a one-time payment for a perpetual term. The only
variable in the final formula is the annual percent change in rent,
which could be determined on a case-by-case basis. However, to provide
some certainty, and since the Per Acre Rent Schedule already utilizes
this component, the BLM believes that using a 10-year average of the
annual difference in the IPD-GDP index will normalize this variable and
avoid either abnormally high or low values that can result from using a
one point-in-time figure. Other than changing the annual index from the
CPI-U to the IPD-GDP, to be consistent with the annual indexing used in
the final Per Acre Rent Schedule, the only other change to paragraph
(a) is the method used to determine the yield rate (or ``Y'' in the
formula). In the proposed rule, the yield rate would have been
determined by the most recent 10-year average of the annual 30-year
Treasury Bond Rate as of January of each year. In the final rule, the
yield rate (Y) used in the income capitalization formula in sections
2806.25(a) and 2885.22(a) is a constant 5.27 percent, again to be
consistent with the constant rate of return utilized in the final Per
Acre Rent Schedule. As such, the rate of return will not be adjusted in
this formula except by new rulemaking, or whenever a separate appraisal
report is completed and approved by the BLM under paragraph (d) of this
section.
Section 2806.25(b) addresses the situation where there is an
existing term grant and you ask BLM to convert it to a perpetual FLPMA
grant under final section 2807.15(b). If you make this request, the BLM
will treat it as an application for an amendment under current section
2807.20. If the BLM approves your request to change the term of your
grant, the BLM will determine the mandatory one-time rental payment as
explained in paragraph (a) of this section. We received no comments on
this paragraph and made no changes to the final rule, except to change
the reference to section 2807.15(c) to 2807.15(b) because of the
consolidation of proposed paragraph (c) with existing paragraph (b).
Section 2806.25(c) provides that if the land your grant encumbers
is being transferred out of Federal ownership and you have a perpetual
grant and have requested a one-time rental payment, or you have
requested the BLM to amend your grant to a perpetual grant and seek a
one-time rental payment, the BLM would base the per acre zone value and
zone number used in the annual rental determination on the per acre
land value from the market information or appraisal report used for the
land transfer action and not the county average per acre land and
building value from the NASS Census. The BLM believes that when the
land a grant encumbers is being transferred out of Federal ownership,
the most accurate and current market data should be used to determine
the one-time rental payment. For example, for Clark County, Nevada, 80
percent of the average per acre land and building value from the 2002
NASS Census is $2,854 (Zone 6 on the 2002 Per Acre Rent Schedule or
$79.05 per acre rent). If an appraisal report for a competitive sale
concluded that the 2002 average per acre land value is instead $175,000
per acre, then the annual per acre rent would be $2,635 (or Zone 12 on
the per acre rent schedule). The BLM would not use the actual appraised
per acre value or the actual per acre sale value to determine the
annual per acre rent, but instead would use the actual appraised per
acre value to determine the appropriate zone number on the Per Acre
Rent Schedule. The zone number then determines the appropriate per acre
rent under final section 2806.25. A few commenters suggested that
holders should always have the option to conduct their own appraisal
under section 2806.25(d). The BLM agrees with these comments and has
therefore revised final section 2806.25(c) to specify that holders may
prepare their own appraisal report under section 2806.25(d).
Section 2806.25(d) explains that when no acceptable market
information is available, and no appraisal has been completed for the
land transfer action, or when the BLM requests it, you must prepare an
appraisal report, at your expense, in accordance with Federal appraisal
standards. The BLM will only require you to prepare an appraisal report
when other acceptable market data is not available. If you must provide
an appraisal report, the DOI's Appraisal Policy Manual, dated October
1, 2006, sets forth the DOI's appraisal policies. Addendum Number 3 to
DOI's Appraisal Policy Manual specifically provides guidance concerning
land valuation, alternative methods of valuation, and appraisal reports
prepared by third (i.e., non-Federal) parties. It is the DOI's policy
that all valuation services (whether performed by DOI appraisers or by
non-DOI appraisers providing valuation services under a DOI contract or
on behalf of a private third party, such as a right-of-way holder) must
conform to the current Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice (USPAP) and the current Uniform Standards for Federal Land
Acquisitions (USFLA).
If you have provided an appraisal report, the BLM State Director
will refer it to the DOI's Appraisal Services Directorate (ASD). The
ASD will review the appraisal report to determine if it meets USPAP and
USFLA standards and advise the BLM State Director accordingly. If these
standards are met, the BLM State Director will then use the data in the
appraisal report to determine the zone value and zone number used in
the calculation of the one-time rent payment provided by paragraphs (a)
and (b). However, if your appraisal report uses a different EF or yield
rate from those in the formula in section 2806.25(a) or section
2885.22(a), then the actual per acre land value as determined by the
appraisal report must be used in the determination of the one-time rent
payment, even if it exceeds the highest per acre land value from the
rent schedule.
The BLM specifically requested comments on whether an appraisal
report, if required, should also address the appropriate EF, in
addition to determining per acre land values. The EF from an appraisal
report could be different from the 50 percent used in the Per Acre Rent
Schedule, depending on the type of facility being authorized (see EF
discussion earlier in the preamble). The rate of return (5.27 percent--
see Table 4) could also change, if the one-time rental payment for a
perpetual grant were determined on a case-by-case basis under final
paragraph 2806.25(d). For example, if the average per acre land and
building value from the NASS Census is $700 (Zone 3 on the 2002 Per
Acre Rent Schedule or $26.35 per acre rent) and an appraisal report
concluded that the 2002 per acre land value is instead $400 per acre
(Zone 2 or a $13.18 per acre rent), but the appraisal report determines
that the EF is 85 percent, then the annual per acre rent would equal
$17.92 ($400 multiplied by .85 multiplied by 5.27 percent). Similar
variations in the final per acre rent value could also occur if the
appraisal report were to determine a higher or lower rate of return. In
the above example, if the appraisal report determined that the per acre
land value is $400, the EF is 85 percent, and the rate of return is 8
percent (instead of 5.27 percent), then the annual per acre rent would
equal $27.20 ($400 multiplied by .85 multiplied by 8.0 percent). Once
the annual rent is calculated, then the one-time payment would then be
determined under section 2806.25(a).
The BLM received several comments on paragraph (d) of this section.
Most
[[Page 65057]]
advocated that the holder always have the opportunity to conduct an
appraisal report under this paragraph, and that the appraisal report
consider all factors in arriving at a one-time rental payment. Some
commenters also advocated the use of appraisal reports, but with limits
on the amount of the EF, i.e., the EF should never exceed 50 percent.
Another commenter asked whether the BLM, in lieu of an appraisal
report, would be able to utilize a process to determine per acre land
values similar to that used in lower value Federal land acquisitions,
known as waiver valuations.
Final section 2806.25(d) specifies that when no acceptable market
information is available and no appraisal report has been completed for
the land transfer action or when the BLM requests it, you must prepare
an appraisal report using Federal appraisal standards that explains how
you estimated the land value per acre, the rate of return, and the EF.
The final rule places no restrictions on the amount of the EF or the
rate of return, but will let the market conditions set these amounts
(e.g., comparable sales data), which in turn determines the annual rent
value and/or the one-time rental payment. The proposed rule would have
mandated that the yield rate be determined by using the 10-year average
of the most recent 30-year Treasury Bond rate. In the final rule, the
yield rate will be determined by current market conditions as
documented in the appraisal report. To place arbitrary and artificial
limits on any of the market conditions used to determine a fair market
value rent would be in violation of Federal appraisal standards (see
Addendum Number 3 to DOI's Appraisal Policy Manual).
The BLM will use the final Per Acre Rent Schedule to determine rent
for all linear facilities (except as provided by sections 2806.25,
2806.26, and 2885.22), even when those facilities occupy minimal
acreage on low value land. We do not foresee any case where ``waiver
valuations'' would be appropriate for use in determining rent for
linear facilities, as suggested by one commenter, although this process
is available to BLM offices to determine (minimum) rental values for
non-linear facilities located on small and/or low valued acreages (see
section 2806.50).
Sections 2806.25(c) and (d) replace sections 2806.20(c) and (d) of
the previous regulations which allowed the BLM to use an alternate
means to compute your rent, if the rent determined by comparable
commercial practices or by an appraisal would be 10 or more times the
rent from the schedule. We made these changes in the final rule to
comply with the Act, which requires the BLM to use a Per Acre Rent
Schedule based upon land values to determine rent for linear right-of-
way grants located on public land.
Section 2806.26 How may I make rental payments when land encumbered by
my perpetual easement issued under Sec. 2807.15(b) is being
transferred out of Federal ownership?
Section 2806.26(a) addresses the situation where there is an
existing term or perpetual grant and you ask BLM to convert it to a
perpetual easement as provided by section 2807.15(b). If you make this
request, the BLM will treat it as an application for an amendment under
current section 2807.20. Under the final rule, if the BLM approved your
request to convert your term or perpetual grant to a perpetual
easement, the BLM will use the appraisal data from the DOI's Appraisal
Services Directorate for the land transfer action (i.e., direct or
indirect land sales, land exchanges, and other land disposal actions)
and other market information to determine the one-time rental payment
for perpetual easements.
Section 2806.26(b) explains that when no appraisal or acceptable
market information is available for the land transfer action or when
the BLM requests it, you must prepare a report required under section
2806.25(d). A new addition to this paragraph in the final rule allows
you to submit an appraisal report on your own initiative in accordance
with section 2806.25(d).
Section 2806.26 is a new section made necessary by the BLM's recent
policy to provide for perpetual easements to existing right-of-way
holders who want to convert their term or perpetual grant to an
easement when the land their grant encumbers is to be transferred out
of Federal ownership under section 2807.15(b). The BLM has worked
closely with its right-of-way customers and holders to develop an
easement document (and policy) similar to the easement document that a
utility company might acquire across private land. Under this policy,
easements (similar to easements that utility companies would acquire
for similar purposes across private land) will only be issued to you
when land your grant encumbers is to be transferred out of Federal
ownership. Since in these cases the BLM will not administer the
easement (because the land your easement encumbers will no longer be
public land), the BLM believes that the one-time payment should be
determined by an appraisal or acceptable market information used to
determine the per acre land value for the land disposal action. The
one-time rental payment determined in this manner will reflect the
value of the rights transferred to you based upon similar transactions
in the private sector, and may or may not be the same as a one-time
payment for a perpetual grant determined under section 2806.25(b).
In the proposed rule, the BLM asked for specific comments on the
need for perpetual easements when encumbered lands are to be
transferred out of Federal ownership as well as whether the BLM has
authority to issue a term easement under the MLA in those circumstances
when encumbered land is to be transferred out of Federal ownership.
The term ``right-of-way'' is defined by FLPMA (43 U.S.C. 1702(f))
to include easements, leases, permits, or licenses to occupy, use, or
traverse public lands granted for the purposes listed in Title V of
FLPMA. Most grants that the BLM issues under FLPMA are set forth on
standard form 2800-14 and denoted ``Right-of-Way Grant/Temporary Use
Permit.'' These grants are not regarded as easements by the agency,
absent some indication to the contrary. Section 506 of FLPMA, 43 U.S.C.
1766, however, clearly contemplates the issuance of easements and
provides that any effort to suspend or terminate these instruments be
accompanied by the procedural safeguards of 5 U.S.C. 554. On the other
hand, the provisions of the MLA at 30 U.S.C. 185 do not expressly
authorize the grant of easements, unlike FLPMA's provisions at 43
U.S.C. 1702(f), 1761(a), and 1766. Both statutes do provide for the
procedural safeguards of 5 U.S.C. 554 in the event of suspension or
termination of the authorization. However, under the MLA the procedural
safeguards of 5 U.S.C. 554 apply to all grants (see 43 U.S.C.
185(o)(1)), whereas, under FLPMA, these safeguards only apply to those
authorizations considered to be easements (43 U.S.C. 1766).
Several commenters stated that permanent easements are necessary to
protect their facilities when encumbered lands are transferred out of
Federal ownership. Other commenters cited instances where the new land
owner demanded unreasonable compensation for continued use of the
right-of-way area, which may then affect delivery costs, as well as
increase product costs to the end users. Commenters also stated that
``easements'' are ``understood'' in the private sector and that there
is an enormous body of case law on the application and interpretation
of easements, while a BLM right-of-way grant is an oddity that is often
misunderstood by the private
[[Page 65058]]
sector. The same commenter said that the ability to have an easement
rather than a BLM grant will greatly simplify management of the
facility by all parties in the long run.
Many commenters on the proposed rule also supported the conversion
of existing term grants to term or permanent easements under the MLA.
Commenters stated that the issuance of a ``term easement'' is
consistent with the current definition of ``grant'' found at 43 CFR
2881.5 (``Grant means any instrument or authorization the BLM issues
under section 28 of the MLA * * * to use Federal lands to construct,
operate, maintain, or terminate a pipeline''). Furthermore, the
commenters stated that the BLM has existing policy allowing for MLA
``term easements'' and the final rule should support and endorse this
policy. One commenter also stated that the one-time rent payment for a
``term easement'' issued under the MLA should be determined by an
appraisal or market data for the land transfer action, similar to the
one-time payment for a FLPMA easement described under section 2806.26.
The BLM agrees with most of the commenters regarding their desire
to be able to convert existing grants to permanent and term easements
when land encumbered by their FLPMA grant is transferred out of Federal
ownership. However, in the final rule we have limited this section to
the determination of one-time rental payments for easements issued
under the FLPMA, and not the MLA. We made this decision because the
term ``right-of-way'' is defined by FLPMA (43 U.S.C. 1702(f))
specifically to include ``easements'' (as well as leases, permits, or
licenses) to occupy, use, or traverse public lands granted for the
purposes listed in Title V of FLPMA, while the provisions of the MLA at
30 U.S.C. 185 do not expressly authorize the grant of easements, and
limit the term of any grant to 30 years or less. In addition, none of
the commenters provided legal support for the issuance of term
easements under Section 28 of the MLA. The BLM also disagrees that the
definition of ``grant'' found at 43 CFR 2881.5 (``Grant means any
instrument or authorization the BLM issues under section 28 of the MLA
* * * to use Federal lands to construct, operate, maintain, or
terminate a pipeline'') is sufficient basis by itself for the issuance
of ``term easements'' because ``easements'' are not specifically
provided for in Section 28 of the MLA.
In summary, final section 2806.26(a) is the same as proposed,
except for revising the paragraph cited in section 2807.15 from
paragraph (c) in the proposed rule to paragraph (b) in the final rule.
Section 2806.26(b) also remains the same as proposed, except the final
rule specifically allows holders to submit an appraisal report on their
own initiative under section 2806.25(d). We made this change to be
consistent with similar changes made in section 2806.25(c).
Subpart 2807--Grant Administration and Operation
The BLM is proposing changes to the section of this subpart that
deals with administration and operation of grants.
Section 2807.15 How is grant administration affected if the land my
grant encumbers is transferred to another Federal agency or out of
Federal ownership?
This section explains how grant administration is affected if the
land your grant encumbers is transferred to another Federal agency or
out of Federal ownership.
Final section 2807.15(a) explains that if there is a proposal to
transfer the land your grant encumbers to another Federal agency, the
BLM may, after reasonable notice to you, transfer administration of
your grant for the lands the BLM formerly administered to another
Federal agency, unless doing so would diminish your rights. If the BLM
determined your rights would be diminished by such a transfer, the BLM
can still transfer the land, but retain administration of your grant
under existing terms and conditions.
We proposed no changes to section 2807.15(b), but we have revised
it in the final rule based upon several comments that the content and
formatting of proposed paragraphs (b) and (c) were confusing. Final
section 2807.15(b) is revised to incorporate the intent of proposed
paragraph (c). Final section 2807.15(b) explains that the BLM will
provide reasonable notice to you if there is a proposal to transfer the
land your grant encumbers out of Federal ownership. If you request it,
the BLM will negotiate new grant terms and conditions with you. This
may include increasing the term of your grant to a perpetual grant or
providing for an easement. These changes become effective prior to the
time the land is transferred out of Federal ownership. The BLM may
then, in conformance with existing policies and procedures:
(1) Transfer the land subject to your grant. In this case,
administration of your grant for the lands the BLM formerly
administered is transferred to the new owner of the land;
(2) Transfer the land, but the BLM retains administration of your
grant; or
(3) Reserve to the United States the land your grant encumbers, and
the BLM retains administration of your grant.
Proposed section 2807.15(c) explained that if there is a proposal
to transfer the land your grant encumbers out of Federal ownership, you
may negotiate new grant terms and conditions with the BLM. This may
include increasing the term of your grant, should you request it, to a
perpetual grant or providing for an easement. These changes would
become effective prior to the time the land is transferred out of
Federal ownership. The proposed rule also removed from section
2807.15(c) the cross-reference to previous section 2806.23(c), which
specified how you made rental payments for perpetual grants. The BLM
received several comments stating that this paragraph appears to
replace existing paragraph 2807.15(b). However, the proposed rule did
not remove or replace paragraph 2807.15(b). One commenter stated that
the proposed section 2807.15(c) does not require the BLM to provide
written notice to the grant holder of a land transfer under paragraph
(c) as does paragraph (b). The commenter stated that notification
should be required under both situations. Two commenters stated that
holders should be given at least 60 days advance written notice while
another commenter recommended at least 180 days of advance notice. Two
commenters provided alternative language to combine previous paragraph
(b) and proposed paragraph (c) of section 2807.15 into a new paragraph
2807.15(b). Proposed paragraph (d) would then become final paragraph
(c). The recommended language submitted by these commenters to replace
previous paragraph (b) and proposed paragraph (c) with a combined
paragraph (b) primarily states that the BLM must provide written
notification of at least 60 days prior to any proposed transfer date so
that new grant terms and conditions can be negotiated. In addition, any
new grant terms and conditions negotiated must be comparable to those
normally found in an easement or other similar document used for
utility facilities on private lands.
The BLM agrees with the commenters that proposed section 2807.15(c)
is confusing because we failed to state that the action discussed in
(c) would actually occur after the reasonable notification period
specified in paragraph (b) and prior to the 3 options specified in
paragraph (b) for
[[Page 65059]]
completing the land transaction. We have therefore combined proposed
paragraph (c) with previous paragraph (b) as explained above. This
assures that reasonable notice is provided to all holders of a pending
land transfer action and allows, at the holder's request, the
conversion of existing FLPMA term grants to perpetual grants or
easements. The land transfer action is then completed by:
(1) Transferring the land subject to your grant. In this case,
administration of your grant for the lands the BLM formerly
administered is transferred to the new owner of the land;
(2) Transferring the land, with the BLM retaining administration of
your grant; or
(3) Reserving to the United States the land your grant encumbers,
and with the BLM retaining administration of your grant.
We did not adopt the specific language submitted by the two
commenters for paragraph (b) because we do not agree that a certain
number of days be specified in the rule, since each land transaction
will be governed by its own timeline. However, the final rule does
specify that reasonable notice will be provided to the holder so that
any amended application to an existing grant may be completed prior to
the transfer of land out of Federal ownership. We also did not adopt
the language submitted for paragraph (b) because it failed to include
the three alternatives (see previous paragraph above) for treating
encumbrances when land is transferred out of Federal ownership.
Proposed section 2807.15(d) explained that you and the new owner of
the land may agree to negotiate new grant terms and conditions at any
time after the land encumbered by your grant is transferred out of
Federal ownership. In the final rule, proposed paragraph (d) is
renumbered as final paragraph (c) because, as discussed above, we
incorporated proposed paragraph (c) into final paragraph (b). No other
changes were made to this section.
Part 2880--Rights-of-Way Under The Mineral Leasing Act
Subpart 2885--Terms and Conditions of MLA Grants and TUPs
This final rule revises 5 existing sections of this subpart and
adds 2 new sections.
Section 2885.11 What terms and conditions must I comply with?
Final section 2885.11(a) explains that all grants, except those
issued for a term of 3 years or less, will expire on December 31 of the
final year of the grant. Previous section 2885.11(a) stated that all
grants with a term of 1 year or longer would terminate on December 31
of the final year of the grant. This correction allows short-term
grants and TUPs to expire on the day before their anniversary date.
This revision also provides the holder of a 3-year grant or TUP with a
full 3-year term to conduct activities authorized by the short-term
right-of-way grant or TUP, instead of the 2 full years plus the partial
first year under the previous section. Final section 2885.21(c)
explains that the BLM considers the first partial calendar year in the
initial rent payment period to be the first year of the term.
Therefore, a 3-year grant or TUP, issued under the previous
regulations, had a term period of 2 years plus the time period
remaining in the calendar year of issuance. A 2-year grant or TUP had a
term period of 1 year plus the time period remaining in the calendar
year of issuance. Depending on when the grant or TUP was issued, the
actual term could have been just over 2 years for a 3-year grant or TUP
and could have been just over 1 year for a 2-year grant or TUP. Under
the final rule, all grants and TUPs, except those issued for a term of
3 years or less expire on December 31 of the final year of the grant or
TUP. The changes to this section allow the holder to use short-term
grants and TUPs for the full period of the grant. For example, if a 3-
year grant or TUP is issued under the final rule on October 1, 2008, it
terminates on September 30, 2011, instead of December 31, 2010, under
the previous rule. If a 2-year grant or TUP is issued under the final
rule on October 1, 2008, it terminates on September 30, 2010, instead
of December 31, 2009, under the previous rule. In most cases, the BLM
will assess a one-time rental bill for the term of the grant, which
reduces any administrative impact which might otherwise result from
this revision. This change is also consistent with final section
2805.11(b)(2). Please refer to the preamble discussion for final
section 2805.11(b)(2) for further information on this revision. We
received no comments on the proposed changes to this section and the
final rule adopts the proposed section without change.
Section 2885.12 What rights does a grant or TUP convey?
Prior section 2885.12(e) stated that you have a right to assign
your grant or TUP to another, provided that you obtain the BLM's prior
written approval. The BLM added the phrase ``unless your grant or TUP
specifically states that such approval is unnecessary'' to this section
to indicate that the BLM's prior written approval may be unnecessary in
certain cases. In most cases, assignments continue to be subject to the
BLM's written approval. However, with this change, the BLM can amend
existing grants and TUPs to allow future assignments without the BLM's
prior written approval. This may be especially important to the future
administration of a grant when the land encumbered by a grant or TUP is
being transferred out of Federal ownership, and there is a request to
increase the term of your grant or TUP under section 2886.15(b). We
received one comment that specifically supported this change. The final
rule adopts the proposed section without change.
Section 2885.19 What is the rent for a linear right-of-way grant?
Final section 2885.19 replaces previous section 2885.19. Final
section 2885.19(a) explains that the BLM will use the Per Acre Rent
Schedule to calculate the rent. In addition, paragraph (a) explains
that counties (or other geographical areas) will be assigned to a
county zone number and per acre zone value based upon 80 percent of
their per acre land and building value published in the NASS Census.
The initial assignment of counties to the zones covers years 2006
through 2010 of the Per Acre Rent Schedule, and is based upon data
contained in the most recent NASS Census (2002). Subsequent assignments
of counties will occur every 5 years following the publication of the
NASS Census. Paragraph (a) further explains that the Per Acre Rent
Schedule will be adjusted periodically as follows:
(1) The BLM will adjust the per acre rent in section 2885.19(b) for
all types of linear right-of-way facilities in each zone each calendar
year based on the average annual change in the IPD-GDP for the 10-year
period immediately preceding the year that the NASS Census data becomes
available. For example, the average annual change in the IPD-GDP from
1994 to 2003 (the 10-year period immediately preceding the year (2004)
that the 2002 NASS Census data became available) is 1.9 percent. This
annual adjustment factor is applied to years 2006 through 2015 of the
Per Acre Rent Schedule. Likewise, the average annual change in the IPD-
GDP from 2004 to 2013 (the 10-year period immediately preceding the
year (2014) when the 2012 NASS Census data will become available) will
be applied to years 2016 through 2025 of the Per Acre Rent Schedule.
(2) The BLM will review the NASS Census data from the 2012 NASS
[[Page 65060]]
Census, and each subsequent 10-year period, and as appropriate, revise
the number of county zones and the per acre zone values. Any revision
will include 100 percent of the number of counties and listed
geographical areas for all states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
and will reasonably reflect their average per acre land and building
values contained in the NASS Census.
The above revision mechanisms replace previous paragraphs (b) and
(c) of section 2885.19.
Final section 2885.19(b) replaces previous section 2885.19(d) and
explains that you may obtain a copy of the current Per Acre Rent
Schedule from any BLM state or field office or by writing to the BLM
and requesting a copy. The BLM also posts the current rent schedule on
the BLM Homepage on the Internet at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.blm.gov.
The Per Acre Rent Schedule (and its various components) referred to
in this section is the same as found in final sections 2806.20,
2806.21, and 2806.22. The BLM received several comments on the
components of the Per Acre Rent Schedule in proposed sections 2806.20,
2806.21, and 2806.22. Based on those comments, counties will be
assigned to a zone in the Per Acre Rent Schedule based on 80 percent of
the average per acre land and building value as found in the NASS
Census instead of 100 percent of that value. The rate of return will be
a constant 5.27 percent which is the 10-year average of the 30-year
Treasury Bond yield from 1998-2008. In addition, the annual index
adjustment will be based on the average annual change in the IPD-GDP
instead of the annual change in the CPI-U. No change was made in how
the BLM will revise the Per Acre Rent Schedule each 10 years other than
delaying its effectiveness by 1 year. The comments to proposed sections
2806.20, 2806.21, and 2806.22 and the BLM's response to those comments
(as reflected in final sections 2806.20, 2806.21 and 2806.22) are
applicable to this section as well and are discussed in greater detail
above.
Section 2885.20 How will BLM calculate my rent for linear rights-of-way
the Per Acre Rent Schedule covers?
Final sections 2885.20(a) and (c) are similar to and replace
previous sections 2885.20(a) and (b), respectively. Final section
2885.20(a) explains that, except as provided by section 2885.22, the
BLM calculates your rent by multiplying the rent per acre for the
appropriate county (or other geographical area) zone from the current
schedule by the number of acres (as rounded up to the nearest tenth of
an acre) in the right-of-way or TUP area that fall in each zone
multiplied by the number of years in the rental payment period (the
length of time for which the holder is paying rent). The final rent
calculation methodology is identical to the previous rent calculation
methodology; only the components (average per acre land values, county
zones, the EF, and rate of return) have been revised. Please refer to
the preamble discussion for section 2806.23(a) for details and examples
of how this process works. Final section 2885.20(c) explains that if
the BLM has not previously used the rent schedule to calculate your
rent, we may do so after giving you reasonable written notice. Except
for a minor edit, we made no substantive changes to these two sections
from what was proposed.
Final section 2885.20(b) provides for the phase-in of the initial
implementation of the Per Acre Rent Schedule by reducing the 2009 per
acre rent by 25 percent, and by providing a limited 2-year phase-in
period as the result of revisions to the rent schedule under section
2885.19(a)(2) if payment of the new rent causes the holder undue
hardship and it is in the public interest to approve the phase-in
period.
In the ANPR and the proposed rule, the BLM specifically requested
comments on whether any phase-in provision is necessary, and if so,
what alternative information, including holder qualifications or
thresholds other than the percentage increase, might the BLM use to
support a longer phase-in period, or to support a phase-in model that
specifically addresses financial hardship due to potentially large
rental increases. The BLM received 6 comments in response to the ANPR
which generally supported a phase-in provision. Three commenters said
that any rental increases greater than $1,000 should be phased-in over
5 years. One commenter said that a 6-year phase-in period would be
appropriate for all rental increases. The commenter suggested no change
for the first year, followed by five 20 percent annual increases. One
commenter supported a phase-in period and potential relief from
increased payment amounts, but offered no specific options.
In the proposed rule, the BLM proposed a limited one-time, 2-year
phase-in provision which would provide the holders of MLA
authorizations hardship provisions similar to those currently available
to holders of FLPMA authorizations. The proposed MLA phase-in provision
would only apply in situations where rent is paid on an annual basis,
and the increase in the rental fee is so substantial (500 percent or
greater increase) that payment of the new rental amount would likely
cause undue financial hardship.
Almost all commenters on the proposed rule stated that some type of
phase-in provision is necessary for all authorization holders in order
to allow sufficient time to absorb the additional fee increases. One
commenter said that the lack of a comprehensive phase-in provision for
holders of FLPMA authorizations was the most unreasonable element of
the proposed rule. Many commenters supported a 5- or 6-year phase-in
period, and one commenter proposed limiting potential fee increases
each year to no more than 10 percent of the initial per acre rental
rate at the time the grant was issued. One commenter said that it was
critical that the new rates not be implemented prior to January 2009.
The BLM does not agree with the commenters that a specific long-
term phase-in provision is always necessary or reasonable when
implementing a new or revised rent schedule, especially when other
existing avenues to mitigate large rental increases are available to
most holders. Under current section 2806.15(c), the BLM State Director
may waive or reduce your rent payment, if the BLM determines that: (1)
Paying the full rent for your FLPMA grant will cause you undue
hardship; and (2) it is in the public interest to waive or reduce your
rent. However, this provision has never been available to holders of
MLA authorizations, nor was it included in the proposed rule. To
provide some relief for MLA holders, final section 2885.20(b)(1)
provides for a phase-in of the initial implementation of the Per Acre
Rent Schedule by reducing the 2009 per acre rent by 25 percent. A
similar provision has been added for holders of FLPMA grants at section
2806.23(b). In calendar year 2009, all holders will pay 75 percent of
the scheduled rental rates, and thereafter, 100 percent of the
scheduled rental rates.
Final section 2885.20(b)(2) will allow a 2-year phase-in period to
holders of MLA grants if, as the result of any revisions made to the
Per Acre Rent Schedule under section 2885.19(a)(2), the payment of the
new annual rental amount would cause a specific MLA holder undue
hardship and it is in the public interest to approve the phase-in.
Holders of FLPMA grants have the same opportunity for a similar phase-
in provision under existing section 2806.15(c).
The phase-in provision in final section 2885.20(b)(2), however, is
limited only to MLA holders that qualify as small business entities (as
that term is defined by the Small
[[Page 65061]]
Business Administration (SBA) regulations). It is estimated that only
5.3 percent of existing MLA grantees may be eligible for SBA programs
(see 70 FR 21056). In addition, the two-year phase-in period will only
be available once each 10-year period when revisions are made to the
Per Acre Rent Schedule under section 2885.19(a)(2). Final section
2885.19(a)(2) provides for the revision of the rent schedule (including
the number of county zones and the per acre zone values) based upon the
NASS Census data from the 2012 NASS Census and each subsequent 10-year
period. Therefore, the earliest year that final section 2885.20(b)(2)
(the MLA phase-in provision based on hardship) will be available for
use is 2016, since the 2012 NASS Census data will not be available
until 2014 and any revised rent schedule based upon the 2012 NASS
Census data will not be implemented until 2016 (see preamble discussion
for section 2806.22). After 2016, final section 2885.20(b)(2) will not
be available for use again until 2026, and then not until 2036, and so
forth.
In addition to meeting the above criteria, the holder must also
prove that payment of the new annual rental amount would cause undue
hardship, that is, be such an expense that payment would cause the
holder significant difficulty in the continued near-term operation of
the subject business or right-of-way facility. Undue hardship is not
shown by allegations of financial difficulty, but requires proof that
the holder would suffer significant financial difficulty, i.e., severe,
unique, or extraordinary difficulty, in the continued near-term
operation of the subject business or right-of-way facility. The
determination of undue hardship must therefore be made on a case by
case basis. The BLM will require the holder to submit information which
supports the claim of undue hardship. At a minimum, this information
must include a credit bureau report and a financial statement. In
addition, the holder must submit information that clearly documents the
holder's financial capability to pay the full rental amount due in year
two of the phase-in period, if approved. The BLM State Director makes
the determination that undue hardship exists based upon a financial
analysis of the information submitted which supports the undue hardship
claim. If the BLM State Director finds that undue hardship exists and
that an additional phase-in is in the public interest, payment of the
amount in excess of the previous year's rent will be phased-in by equal
increments over a 2-year period. In addition, the BLM will adjust the
total calculated rent for year 2 of the phase-in period by the annual
index provided by section 2885.19(a)(1).
The BLM believes that many of the concerns expressed by commenters
regarding the lack of a comprehensive phase-in provision in the
proposed rule have thus been addressed in the final rule by providing
more advance notice of potentially large rental increases, reducing the
NASS Census land and building value for each county by 20 percent,
reducing the rate of return by 18.5 percent (from 6.47 percent to 5.27
percent), reducing the threshold from $1,000 to $500 for payment of
annual rent instead of 10-year rental payments, and by waiving 25
percent of the calendar year 2009 rental rates for all authorization
holders. These actions combined have eliminated the need for a 5-or 6-
year phase-in period because the amount of the increase in rent
receipts has been significantly reduced in the final rule. Holders will
save nearly $10 million (or 54 percent) when comparing the rates/phase-
in provisions contained in the proposed rule with the rates/phase-in
provisions contained in the final rule (using actual acres billed for
calendar year 2007). The proposed rates would have generated a total of
$18,570,871 in 2007 if all acres were billed annually. Under the final
rule, including the initial, one-time, 25 percent phase-in provision in
rental rates, total rental receipts drop to $8,635,023. Without the
initial, one-time, 25 percent phase-in provision, the total rental
receipts would have been $11,512,757, or a 38 percent reduction in
rental receipts from the proposed rule.
The BLM does not agree with the commenter that proposed limiting
potential fee increases each year to no more than 10 percent of the
initial per acre rental rate at the time the grant was issued. First,
once the final schedule is implemented, increases in rent will be
limited to the change in the annual IPD-GDP adjustment (which has
historically averaged around 2 to 3 percent). Every 5 years, holders
could experience additional rent increases because of the re-assignment
of counties to new zones on the rent schedule. However, holders will
have approximately 18 months of advance notice to prepare for any
potential increases. Thus, most annual rent increases will be
significantly less than 10 percent and holders will have adequate
notice to prepare for any major increases that might result from
counties being assigned to new rental zones based on new NASS Census
data.
Secondly, the BLM believes it would be an extreme administrative
burden to cap potential annual rent increases at 10 percent per
authorization, as this commenter suggested, because grants are always
subject to amendments and assignments that can affect the acres subject
to rent. It would be very difficult and expensive for the BLM to
adequately administer these potential changes and limit rent increases
only in response to adjustments in the rent schedule itself, as
compared to actual changes in the number of acres billed for that
authorization from year to year.
Lastly, the BLM partially agrees with the commenter that said it
was critical that the new rates not be implemented prior to January
2009. All existing grants should be billed on the calendar year basis
and not their anniversary date. Therefore, the earliest the new rent
schedule will apply to existing grants is January 2009, which is
consistent with the suggestion of this commenter. However, if the new
rent schedule becomes effective in calendar year 2008, the initial rent
for new authorizations will be determined in accordance with the new
rent schedule, even if the issuance date of the new grant is prior to
January 2009.
The BLM does not expect the rental increases to be financially
burdensome for most holders. The changes made in the Per Acre Rent
Schedule in the final rule represent a permanent reduction of nearly 40
percent over the proposed rates (reducing the NASS Census land and
building value for each county by 20 percent and reducing the rate of
return by 18.5 percent (from 6.47 percent to 5.27 percent)). We believe
that these changes, along with an additional 1-year advance notice of
potentially large rental increases, reducing the threshold from $1,000
to $500 for payment of annual rent instead of 10-year rental payments,
and by waiving 25 percent of the calendar year 2009 rental rates for
all authorization holders, in conjunction with the more flexible rent
payment options described in final sections 2806.24 and 2885.21, will
provide appropriate relief from any large, unexpected increases in rent
payments that are due to implementation of the revised linear rent
schedule.
Section 2885.21 How must I make rental payments for a linear grant or
TUP?
Final section 2885.21(a) explains that for TUPs you must make a
one-time nonrefundable payment for the term of the TUP. For grants,
except those that have been issued in perpetuity, you must make either
nonrefundable annual payments or a nonrefundable payment for more than
1 year, as follows:
[[Page 65062]]
(1) One-time payments. You may pay in advance the total rent amount
for the entire term of the grant or any remaining years;
(2) Multiple payments. If you choose not to make a one-time
payment, you must pay according to one of the following methods:
(i) Payments by individuals. If your annual rent is $100 or less,
you must pay at 10-year intervals not to exceed the term of the grant.
If your annual rent is greater than $100, you may pay annually or at
10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant. For example, if
you have a grant with a remaining term of 30 years, you may pay in
advance for 10 years, 20 years, or 30 years, but not any other multi-
year period.
(ii) Payments by all others. If your annual rent is $500 or less,
you must pay rent at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the
grant. If your annual rent is greater than $500, you may pay annually
or at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant.
Final section 2885.21(a) replaces the rent payment options in
previous section 2885.21(a). The primary difference is that under final
section 2885.21(a), individuals who hold a grant with an annual rent
greater than $100 would have the option to pay annually or at 10-year
intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant. For example, if you
have a grant with a term of 30 years, you may pay in advance for 10
years, 20 years, or 30 years, but not any other multi-year period.
Previously, individuals that held a grant with an annual rent greater
than $100 would have had the option to pay annually or for any multi-
year period. The BLM made this change to make the rent payment options
for individuals consistent with those available to non-individuals,
except for the annual threshold levels of $100 and $500, respectively.
If rent is not paid for the full term, subsequent rental payments will
be based on the changes to the rental schedule as described in section
2885.19 (the annual CPI-U index adjustment; the re-assignment of
counties each 5-year period; and/or the adjustment to the number and
value of rental zones each 10-year period), but the $100 and $500
thresholds used to determine the eligibility for annual payments by
individuals and business entities, respectively, will not be adjusted.
Final section 2885.21(b) explains how you must make rent payments
for perpetual grants issued prior to November 16, 1973, except as
provided by final section 2885.22(a). Previous section 2885.21 did not
recognize that MLA grants issued prior to November 16, 1973, could have
been issued for any term period, including a perpetual term. Under the
MLA, grants issued after November 16, 1973, have a maximum term of 30
years. We added final section 2885.21(b) to explain that if you have an
existing perpetual grant, you must make either nonrefundable annual
payments or a nonrefundable payment for more than 1 year, as follows:
(1) Payments by individuals. If your annual rent is $100 or less,
you must pay at 10-year intervals, not to exceed 30 years. If your
annual rent is greater than $100, you may pay annually or at 10-year
intervals, not to exceed 30 years.
(2) Payments by all others. If your annual rent is $500 or less,
you must pay rent at 10-year intervals, not to exceed 30 years. If your
annual rent is greater than $500, you may pay annually or at 10-year
intervals, not to exceed 30 years.
Final section 2885.21(c) is nearly identical to previous section
2885.21(b). This section explains that the BLM considers the first
partial calendar year in the initial rental payment period to be the
first year of the term. The BLM prorates the first year rental amount
based on the number of months left in the calendar year after the
effective date of the grant.
Please refer to the preamble discussion for final section 2806.24
for an explanation of the revisions to this section and examples of
various rent payment periods, as well as a discussion of any comments
received on this section and the BLM's response to those comments.
Section 2885.22 How may I make rental payments when land encumbered by
my term or perpetual linear grant is being transferred out of Federal
ownership?
Final section 2885.22 explains how you would make one-time rental
payments for your term or perpetual linear grant when land encumbered
by your grant is being transferred out of Federal ownership.
Final section 2885.22(a) explains how the BLM would determine a
one-time rent payment for perpetual MLA grants issued prior to November
16, 1973, when land encumbered by your grant is being transferred out
of Federal ownership. If you have a perpetual grant and the land your
grant encumbers is being transferred out of Federal ownership, you may
choose to make a one-time rental payment. The BLM will determine the
one-time payment for perpetual right-of-way grants by dividing the
current annual rent for the subject property by an overall
capitalization rate calculated from market data. The overall
capitalization rate is the difference between a market yield rate and a
percent annual rent increase as described in the formula below. The
formula for this calculation is: One-time payment = annual rent/(Y-CR),
where:
(1) Annual rent = current annual rent applicable to a subject
property from the Per Acre Rent Schedule;
(2) Y = yield rate (rate of return) from the Per Acre Rent
Schedule (5.27 percent); and
(3) CR = annual percent change in rent as determined by the most
recent 10-year average of the difference in the IPD-GDP Index from
January of one year to January of the following year.
The annual rent will be determined from the Per Acre Rent Schedule
(see section 2885.19(b)), as updated under section 2885.19(a)(1) and
(2). However, as final section 2885.22(b) explains, the per acre zone
value and zone number used in the annual rental determination is based
on the per acre value from acceptable market information or an
appraisal, if any, for the land transfer action and not the county
average per acre land and building value from the NASS Census. You may
also submit an appraisal report on your own initiative under section
2806.25(d).
One commenter recommended that if the BLM uses the appraised land
value (as provided by final section 2885.22(b)) to determine the
appropriate zone on the rent schedule, then the formula to determine
the one-time rent payment, as determined under final section
2885.22(a), should be modified to use the yield rate (Y) rather than
the yield rate less the annual percent change in rent (CR). The formula
would then be: one-time rent payment = Annual Rent/Y; rather than the
one-time payment = Annual Rent/(Y-CR). The commenter said that this
change is necessary to avoid the situation where the one-time payment
under the appraisal method is greater than the one-time payment under
the yield method. The commenter said that the change in the annual
index is not necessary since the appraisal method already reflects the
current land values for the purposes of calculating the one-time
payment. The BLM understands the basis for this comment, but disagrees
that it would be an appropriate change to make in this instance. The
commenter claims that if appraisal data is used to assign land to a
zone on the Per Acre Rent Schedule, then the annual rent adjustment
index (CR in the formula) should be excluded from the formula when
determining one-time rent. We disagree because the Per Acre Rent
Schedule is still being
[[Page 65063]]
used to establish the annual per acre rental value and the annual
adjustment factor is an inherent component of the schedule. For
example, if appraisal data were to be used each 5-year period to re-
assign counties to their appropriate zones on the rent schedule, the
annual adjustment factor (the annual percent change in rent as
determined by the most recent 10-year average of the difference in the
IPD-GDP Index from January of one year to January of the following
year) would still be applied to determine subsequent year's per acre
rent value and would continue until the next appraisal. In situations
where the rent schedule is not used in any way to determine the one-
time rental payment (such as for easements pursuant to section 2806.26)
it might be appropriate to exclude the annual adjustment factor from
the above formula, but only if the appraisal report did not provide for
an annual adjustment factor. In this circumstance, the Per Acre Rent
Schedule (and its various components, including the annual adjustment
factor) is still used to determine the annual per acre rent value,
which in turn, is used in the income capitalization formula to
determine the one-time rent payment.
Final section 2885.22(c) explains that, when no acceptable market
information is available and no appraisal has been completed for the
land transfer action, or when the BLM requests it, you must prepare an
appraisal report as required under section 2806.25(d) of this chapter.
We received one comment on this section stating that holders should
always have the opportunity to submit their own appraisal report to
determine one-time rent for perpetual right-of-way grants when land
encumbered by the grant is transferred out of Federal ownership. We
agree with the commenter (see discussion for section 2806.25(c) for
rationale) and allow for this in the final rule (see section
2885.22(b)). Otherwise, final section 2885.22(c) is the same as
proposed.
Section 2885.22(d) is new to the final rule, and explains how rent
for a term grant is determined when the land encumbered by the grant is
being transferred out of Federal ownership. This section also explains
that the amount determined must not exceed the one-time rent payment
for a perpetual grant as determined under paragraphs (a) and (b). The
BLM added this paragraph to the final rule based upon a comment that
stated that in a rare occurrence, the one-time rent payment for term
grants could exceed the one-time payment for a perpetual grant. The BLM
agrees that, although unlikely, this could occur, but only when one-
time rents are being calculated for MLA grants under this section. This
situation could not occur for FLPMA authorizations since the holder
always has the option of obtaining a perpetual grant, nor would it
occur for rents calculated under section 2885.21, since term and
perpetual grants are treated equally under that section.
Please refer to the preamble discussion for final section 2806.25
for additional details regarding one-time rent payments for perpetual
grants when the land your grant encumbers is being transferred out of
Federal ownership.
Subpart 2886--Operations on MLA Grants and TUPs
The BLM is amending one section of this subpart which deals with
administration and operations of grants and TUPs.
Section 2886.15 How is grant or TUP administration affected if the BLM
land my grant or TUP encumbers is transferred to another Federal agency
or out of Federal ownership?
This section explains how grant administration is affected if the
BLM land your grant or TUP encumbers is transferred to another Federal
agency or out of Federal ownership. We proposed no changes to previous
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. However, previous paragraph (c)
was split into proposed paragraphs (c) and (d) to make it clearer.
Although we proposed no changes to section 2886.15(b), we have
revised it in the final rule based upon several comments that the
proposed formatting of paragraphs (b) and (c) was extremely confusing.
We therefore combined proposed paragraph (c) with previous paragraph
(b) as follows. Final section 2886.15(b) has been revised to
incorporate the intent of proposed paragraph (c) and explains that the
BLM will provide reasonable notice to you if there is a proposal to
transfer the land your grant or TUP encumbers out of Federal ownership.
Furthermore, if you request, the BLM will negotiate new grant or TUP
terms and conditions with you. This may include increasing the term of
your grant to a 30-year term or replacing your TUP with a grant. These
changes, if any, become effective prior to the time the land is
transferred out of Federal ownership. The BLM may then, in conformance
with existing policies and procedures:
(1) Transfer the land subject to your grant or TUP. In this case,
administration of your grant or TUP for the lands the BLM formerly
administered is transferred to the new owner of the land;
(2) Transfer the land, but the BLM retains administration of your
grant or TUP; or
(3) Reserve to the United States the land your grant or TUP
encumbers, and the BLM retains administration of your grant or TUP.
The above changes provide assurance that reasonable notice will be
given to all holders of a pending land transfer action and allows, at
the holder's request, the opportunity to negotiate new grant or TUP
terms and conditions with the BLM. This may include increasing the term
of a grant to a 30-year term or replacing a TUP with a grant. Please
refer to the preamble discussion in section 2806.26 for the comments
received on the issuance of term easements under MLA and the rationale
for not providing for term easements in this section. Please refer to
the preamble discussion in section 2807.15 above for the comments
received on proposed sections 2807.15 and 2886.15 and the rationale for
the changes described herein.
Proposed section 2886.15(d) explained that you and the new owner of
the land may agree to negotiate new grant terms and conditions at any
time after the land encumbered by your grant or TUP is transferred out
of Federal ownership. In the final rule, proposed paragraph (d) is
renumbered as final paragraph (c) because we incorporated proposed
paragraph (c) into final paragraph (b) as discussed above. No other
changes were made to this section.
Subpart 2888--Trespass
This rule revises one section of this subpart which pertains to
trespass.
Section 2888.10 What is trespass?
Final section 2888.10 is identical to previous section 2888.10
except for a minor edit to paragraph (c). Final section 2888.10(c) does
not include the previous reference in section 2888.10 that the rental
exemption provisions of part 2800 do not apply to grants issued under
this part. This reference is no longer necessary because we added
language to final section 2806.14(b), which explains that the rent
exemptions listed in final section 2806.14 do not apply if you are in
trespass. This includes trespass actions covered under final section
2888.10. Please refer to the preamble discussion for final section
2806.14(b) for further details on the reasons for this change.
[[Page 65064]]
Part 2920--Leases, Permits, and Easements
Subpart 2920--Lease, Permits, and Easements: General Provisions
The rule amends two sections of this subpart, which addresses fees
and reimbursement of costs.
Section 2920.6 Reimbursement of Costs
Previous section 2920.6(b) has been amended by deleting from the
second sentence the phrase ``except that any permit whose total rental
is less than $250 shall be exempt from reimbursement of costs
requirements.'' Final section 2920.6(b) explains that the reimbursement
of costs for authorizations issued under part 2920 will be in
accordance with sections 2804.14 and 2805.16, which provide for the
reimbursement of processing and monitoring costs. Previously, any
permit whose total rent was less than $250 would have been exempt from
reimbursement of processing and monitoring costs.
Section 2920.8 Fees
Previously, section 2920.8(b) provided that each request for
renewal, transfer, or assignment of a lease or easement be accompanied
by a non-refundable processing fee of $25. Also, the authorized officer
could waive or reduce this fee for requests for permit renewals that
could be processed with a minimal amount of work. Final section
2920.8(b) amends the previous section by making each request for
renewal, transfer, or assignment of a lease or easement subject to both
a non-refundable processing and monitoring fee determined under section
2804.14 and section 2805.16. The second sentence of the previous
section, which allowed the authorized officer to waive or reduce this
fee for permit renewals, is also deleted because fees for actions
processed with a minimal amount of work are accounted for in current
sections 2804.14 and 2805.16. These revisions are corrections to the
2005 right-of-way rule, which established a schedule for processing and
monitoring fees for applications and grants issued under parts 2800,
2880, and 2920. These revisions are necessary to provide the correct
cross references to the appropriate processing and monitoring fees
found in sections 2804.14 and 2805.16 for actions taken under part
2920.
III. Procedural Matters
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
In accordance with the criteria in Executive Order 12866, this rule
is not a significant regulatory action. The Office of Management and
Budget makes the final determination as to its significance under
Executive Order 12866.
a. This rule does not have an annual effect of $100 million or more
on the economy. It will not adversely affect in a material way the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities. A cost-benefit and economic analysis has not been
prepared. However, the following economic analysis and calculations
supports this conclusion.
Estimated Economic Effects. The rule could potentially increase
rental revenues collected by the BLM and, conversely, increase costs to
grant holders, by an estimated average of $14.7 million each year (plus
annual IPD-GDP adjustments).
Background
The definition of the baseline is an important step in evaluating
the economic effects of a regulation. The baseline is taken to be the
regulations previously in place. A baseline assumption is that under
the status quo, right-of-way activity on Federal lands would continue
at least at current levels. Given that the final rule incorporates many
suggestions received from industry on the ANPR and the proposed rule,
continued right-of-way activity on Federal lands seems a reasonable
assumption.
Current Right-of-Way Activity
In 2007 the BLM administered 12,500 rights-of-way subject to linear
rent, held by over 1,600 entities, covering approximately 373,000 acres
in 15 states. Some right-of-way holders have a single grant, while
others hold hundreds of individual grants. Individual right-of-way
holdings may be as small as 0.01 acre or larger than 22,000 acres. The
top 18 grant-holders (by acreage) account for more than one-half of the
total acreage. Eighty percent of the total right-of-way acreage is held
by about 4 percent of all grant-holders, while the smallest 1,000
grant-holders account for less than 1 percent of total right-of-way
acreage. The breakdown by rental payments is similar to the breakdown
by acreage.
Original Rent Schedule
The original 1987 rent schedule was intended to reduce the need for
individual appraisals, establish consistent rationale for determination
of rental, reduce the differences between procedures used by the FS and
the BLM, resolve conflicts which led to numerous appeals of rental
determinations, and reduce both government and industry administrative
costs. The right-of-way rental rates assessed in 2007 were derived from
the 1987 rule's schedule, presented in Tables 7 and 8.
Table 7--Previous per Acre Rent Schedule for electric transmission
and distribution lines, telephone lines, non-energy related pipelines,
and other linear rights-of-way.
Previous Rule
[1987 Zone Value x 70% x 6.41% x Annual Change in IPD-GDP (+62% 1987-
2007)]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1987 zone 2007 actual
Zone value zone rent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zone 1........................................ $50 $3.65
Zone 2........................................ 100 7.28
Zone 3........................................ 200 14.60
Zone 4........................................ 300 21.90
Zone 5........................................ 400 29.20
Zone 6........................................ 500 36.49
Zone 7........................................ 600 43.81
Zone 8........................................ 1,000 72.97
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 8--Previous per Acre Rent Schedule for oil, gas, and other
energy-related pipelines, roads, ditches, and canals.
Previous Rule
[1987 Zone Value x 80% x 6.41% x Annual Change in IPD-GDP (+62% 1987-
2007)]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1987 zone 2007 actual
Zone value zone rent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zone 1........................................ $50 $4.17
Zone 2........................................ 100 8.32
Zone 3........................................ 200 16.71
Zone 4........................................ 300 25.00
Zone 5........................................ 400 33.39
Zone 6........................................ 500 41.70
Zone 7........................................ 600 50.03
Zone 8........................................ 1,000 83.40
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zone rent for 2007 is based on zone rent for 1987. Zone rent per
acre for 1987 is found by determining the correct zone for a right-of-
way, then multiplying the zone value (i.e., the upper bracket for land
values per acre within a zone) by the EF (70 percent for electric and
telephone lines; 80 percent for energy-related pipelines and roads) and
the return on investment (6.41 percent). This 1987 zone rent is
converted to 2007 zone rent using the change in the IPD-GDP between
1987
[[Page 65065]]
and 2007 (approximately a 62 percent increase).
Final Rent Schedule
The zone brackets in the schedule in this final rule are set to
accommodate all U.S. counties and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,
based upon 80 percent of their average per acre land and building value
published in the most recent NASS Census. The average per acre land and
building values for the 3,080 counties identified in the NASS Census
range from a low of $75 to a high of nearly $100,000. Table 9 shows the
zone brackets for the 12 zones in the final rule.
Table 9--Rental Zones, Based on 2002 NASS Census Average per Acre County
Land and Building Values
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 Land and building values Zone
------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1 to $250................................. Zone 1
$251 to $500............................... Zone 2
$501 to $1,000............................. Zone 3
$1,001 to $1,500........................... Zone 4
$1,501 to $2,000........................... Zone 5
$2,001 to $3,000........................... Zone 6
$3,001 to $5,000........................... Zone 7
$5,001 to $10,000.......................... Zone 8
$10,001 to $20,000......................... Zone 9
$20,001 to $30,000......................... Zone 10
$30,001 to $50,000......................... Zone 11
$50,001 to $100,000........................ Zone 12
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the BLM's purposes, each of the 3,080 counties identified in
the NASS Census is assigned to a zone, based on 80 percent of the
average per acre land and building value as determined by the most
recent NASS Census. At the time of this final rule, the most current
NASS Census provides 2002 data. The next NASS Census will provide 2007
data, and is due to be published in 2009.
Determining Right-of-Way Rent
Annual right-of-way rent for 2002 is based on the following
factors:
1. Schedule zone, determined by 80 percent of the county's 2002
average per acre land and building value;
2. EF (set at 50 percent for all linear rights-of-way);
3. Government's rate of return, set at the average of the 30-year
Treasury bond rate, taken over the 10 years from 1998 to 2008; and
4. Total acreage within the right-of-way area.
The zone rent is adjusted annually by the change in the Gross
Domestic Product, Implicit Price Deflator index.
Table 10 shows the right-of-way rent per acre for each zone for the
2002 base rent year. The annual per acre rent in this table is
determined by multiplying the county zone value (upper limit) by the EF
and the rate of return. The EF is a measure of the degree that a
particular type of facility encumbers a right-of-way area or excludes
other types of land uses and is set at 50 percent. The rate of return
represents the return the Government could reasonably expect for the
use of public assets, and is set at the average of the 30-year Treasury
bond taken over the previous 10 years from 1998 to 2008 or 5.27
percent. Table 5 also displays the per acre rent values for each county
zone for the 2002 base year and each subsequent year after application
of the annual index.
Table 10--2002 Base Year--per Acre Rent Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Right-of-
way
Zone number Maximum annual
zone value rental
rate*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zone 1.......................................... $250 $6.59
Zone 2.......................................... 500 13.18
Zone 3.......................................... 1,000 26.35
Zone 4.......................................... 1,500 39.53
Zone 5.......................................... 2,000 52.70
Zone 6.......................................... 3,000 79.05
Zone 7.......................................... 5,000 131.75
Zone 8.......................................... 10,000 263.50
Zone 9.......................................... 20,000 527.00
Zone 10......................................... 30,000 790.50
Zone 11......................................... 50,000 1,317.50
Zone 12......................................... 100,000 2,635.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Per acre right-of-way rent for one year calculated assuming a 50
percent EF and 5.27 percent rate of return.
The total amount a right-of-way grant holder is billed also depends
on the number of acres within the right-of-way area that fall within
each zone and the years in the rent payment period. Once the per-acre
rent has been determined for a particular right-of-way, this amount is
multiplied by the total acreage in the right-of-way, and by the number
of years in the rent payment period.
Phase-In Provision
The BLM has added an initial phase-in provision for all holders..
The BLM will phase-in the initial implementation of the Per Acre Rent
Schedule by reducing the 2009 per acre rent by 25 percent. In calendar
year 2009, all holders will pay 75 percent of the scheduled rental
rates, and thereafter, 100 percent of the scheduled rental rates. An
additional 2-year phase-in period may be granted to holders of MLA
grants if, as the result of any revisions made to the Per Acre Rent
Schedule under section 2885.19(a)(2), the payment of the new annual
rental amount would cause a specific holder undue hardship and it is in
the public interest to approve the phase-in. However, only holders of
MLA grants that qualify as a small business entity (as that term is
defined by the Small Business Administration regulations) will be
eligible for this additional phase-in period. Holders of FLPMA grants
have the same opportunity for a similar phase-in provision under
existing section 2806.15(c).
Estimated Impacts of the Final Schedule
The increase in rental fees could have potential impacts on all
holders of right-of-way grants, as well as the energy industry and,
ultimately, energy consumers. To the extent that right-of-way grant-
holders continue to maintain facilities on public land whose value has
increased since 1987, there will also be an increase in rental fees to
the U.S. Treasury. Some of the increase in fees may be passed on to
energy consumers in the form of higher utility bills, but we expect
that if there is any increase, as explained below, it will be minimal.
Tierney and Hibbard (2006) conducted a study (see Tierney, S.F.,
and Hibbard, P.J., 2006, Energy Policy Act Section 1813 Comments:
Report of the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation for
Submission to the U.S. Departments of Energy and Interior, Boston, MA)
of the contribution of right-of-way costs to end-user energy prices,
finding that:
1. Right-of-way costs in general are a minor component of regulated
electric transmission and gas transportation rates, regardless of how
land value changes by location or with time;
2. When viewed from the perspective of end-use consumer prices, the
costs to acquire rights-of-way are de minimis; and
3. In the case of gas markets and competitive electricity markets,
changes to right-of-way costs generally affect commodity supplier
profits, not retail prices.
Based on this analysis, there will likely be no significant impact
on consumers as a result of the changes this rule makes to previous
regulations.
Estimated Costs Under the Final Schedule
The expected response to an increase in a good's price is a
decrease in the quantity demanded of that good. Thus, if the net effect
of the rule is to raise a right-of-way grant holder's full cost of
maintaining a right-of-way on public land, it would be reasonable to
predict a decrease in the number of right-of-way applications.
Nevertheless, given the finding by Tierney and Hibbard (2006) that
right-of-way costs in general (not
[[Page 65066]]
restricted to Federal lands) are a minor portion of total energy
transportation costs, no significant decrease in energy right-of-way
activity is expected. The BLM also believes for the same reasons that
no significant decrease in non-energy right-of-way activity would occur
due to the increase in right-of-way costs.
Assuming that right-of-way activity is relatively insensitive to
the rental fee, it is possible to estimate the payments that would have
been due to the BLM (U.S. Treasury) in FY 2007 had the final schedule
been in effect. The following analyses are based on data from the BLM's
automated lands billing system (Land and Realty Authorization Module).
In 2007, the BLM issued bills for 12,545 linear right-of-way
grants. Approximately half of these bills were for rent payment periods
of 5 years or more. The total amount billed for these linear grants was
$6.5 million. Had these rights-of-way been paid under the new schedule
(for the same rent payment periods), the total collected would have
been $14 million, an increase of approximately $7.5 million, or 115
percent. The BLM expects that it will continue to issue approximately
the same number of bills for the same number of annual authorizations
each year, while the number of bills for multi-year rental payments
will continue to decline. It is expected that those authorizations with
annual rental payments in excess of $500 will continue to be billed on
an annual basis, although the holder has the option to pay for 10-year
terms or the entire term of the grant. Under the final rule, the holder
will have to pay for a minimum 10-year period if the annual rental
payment is $500 or less for a non-individual or $100 or less for an
individual. Under the 1987 regulations, the maximum rental payment term
was 5 years. The 2005 rule required the holder to pay for the term of
the grant, or at 10-year intervals, unless the holder was an individual
whose annual rent was greater than $100, in which case, annual payments
could have been made.
Table 11 lists the 15 states and the total linear right-of-way
acreage within each state that was billed for rent in 2007. If this
acreage (373,000) were billed on just an annual basis, the total rent
assessed using the previous Per Acre Rent Schedule and previous
regulations would be $5.1 million. If this same acreage were assessed
annual rent in 2007 using the Per Acre Rent Schedule of this final
rule, the total rent would have been $11.5 million, an increase of $6.4
million. Changes in rental payments are due in large part to changes in
land values underlying the rights-of-way that have occurred since the
previous per acre rent schedule was implemented in 1987. According to
the 2006 NASS annual report, between 1987 and 2002, U.S. per acre farm
real estate values increased by 102 percent on average. Table 11 shows
an increase in annual rent payments of 126 percent. However, if the
$11.5 million in 2007 rent receipts were reduced by 11 percent (the
percent change in the annual index factor (IPD-GDP) between 2002 and
2007) to $10.2 million, the increase in annual rent payments is 101
percent, or nearly identical to the change in land values in the United
States from 1987 to 2002.
The 2007 NASS annual report shows an additional 79 percent increase
in U.S. per acre farm real estate values from 2002 to 2007. We expect
rent receipts to increase proportionately in 2011, which will be the
year that the counties are re-assigned to their proper zone on the Per
Acre Rent Schedule based upon 80 percent of their per acre land and
building value from the 2007 NASS Census. As mentioned previously, the
2007 NASS Census data will not be available until June 2009 and will
not be used to re-assign the counties to their appropriate rent zone
until 2011.
Table 11--Linear Right-of-Way Acres by State: Previous and Final Rent for 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Year rental 1 Year rental Percentage
State Acres (previous rates) (final rates) increase
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AZ...................................... 25,972.55 $482,096.84 $1,405,313.66 191.50
CA...................................... 43,461.11 796,888.69 3,079,639.74 286.46
CO...................................... 18,223.78 315,362.80 600,722.06 90.49
ID...................................... 22,114.09 351,734.14 949,494.24 169.95
MT...................................... 4,908.93 72,353.90 66,009.14 -8.77
ND...................................... 42.52 353.76 315.50 -10.82
NE...................................... 133.73 973.66 994.50 2.14
NM...................................... 81,822.40 839,551.79 959,839.30 14.33
NV...................................... 63,254.22 1,114,387.79 2,326,616.45 108.78
OR...................................... 10,083.36 125,462.21 417,482.76 232.76
SD...................................... 119.33 2,611.72 2,573.20 -1.47
TX...................................... 81.64 679.24 4,843.70 613.11
UT...................................... 18,149.87 186,804.30 431,210.96 130.84
WA...................................... 264.49 5,101.85 37,999.03 644.81
WY...................................... 84,351.65 794,070.09 1,229,703.20 54.86
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................... 372,983.67 5,088,432.78 11,512,757.44 126.25
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 12 provides the percent change in land values and the percent
change in rent receipts for the 15 counties having over 5,000 billed
acres in rights-of-way, as of 2007. Taken together, these 15 counties
account for over 53 percent of all right-of-way acres billed by the BLM
in 2007, and over 55 percent of the rent collected for 2007. San
Bernardino County, California (see Table 12), is a good example of how
land values in some counties have risen dramatically in the last 20
years. This southern California county had 24,822 acres of public land
encumbered by authorized right-of-way facilities that were billed for
rent in 2007 using the previous rent schedule. The previous schedule
was based on a 1987 land value of $200 per acre for San Bernardino
County, meaning that these holdings were valued at a total of $5
million in 1987. Applying the IPD-GDP factor used in the previous
schedule increased the value of this land to $7.1 million in 2002. The
2002 NASS land and building data lists San Bernardino County at $2,144
per acre, for a total value of $53.2 million. This data indicates that
in this example the Federal Government was
[[Page 65067]]
basing linear right-of-way rents on only 13.3 percent of the 2002 land
value, largely due to the rapid increase in land values in southern
California since 1987. Furthermore, the NASS annual reports show that
between 2002 and 2007 farm real estate values have increased an average
of 79 percent nationwide. A continued trend of rising real estate
values would have led to further undervaluation by the previous
schedule. As a result, had the BLM used the Per Acre Rent Schedule of
this final rule to assess rent for linear right-of-way acres in San
Bernardino County in FY 2007, rental receipts would have increased
nearly 300 percent (see Table 12).
In contrast, land values in most counties in New Mexico and
Wyoming, where the majority of linear rights-of-way are located, have
increased at a much slower rate than the national average. Had the
final rent schedule been in effect for 2007, most counties in these 2
states would have experienced only modest increases in rents due, or
even decreases. For example, in San Juan County, New Mexico, where
between 1987 and 2002 the value of land increased by over 200 percent,
rents would have increased by 79 percent. In Sweetwater County,
Wyoming, where between 1987 (per BLM's per acre rent schedule) and 2002
(per the NASS Census data) land values have actually fallen, rents
would have been almost flat, decreasing by 7 percent. These lower land
values in New Mexico and Wyoming would result in only a 14 percent and
a 55 percent increase, respectively, in the total rental receipts,
statewide, for 2007 (as compared to a 286 percent increase for
California and a 126 percent increase for all BLM states) when using
the Per Acre Rent Schedule of this final rule as compared with the
total rental receipts for 2007 when using the previous Per Acre Rent
Schedule (see Table 11).
Table 12--Percent Change in Land Values and Rent Receipts by Counties With 5,000 or More Acres Billed for Right-of-Way Facilities on Public Land in 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 2007
1987 2002 NASS Percent Assessed Assessed Percent
County State Right-of- Assigned Census land change in rent using rent using increase
Way acres land value value land value previous final in rent
schedule schedule receipts
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sweetwater.......................... WY..................... 28,420 $100 $98 -2 $227,684 $210,877 -7
San Bernardino...................... CA..................... 24,822 200 2,144 972 377,399 1,472,668 290
San Juan............................ NM..................... 24,523 100 324 224 202,640 363,679 79
Eddy................................ NM..................... 21,456 100 255 155 173,465 159,205 -8
Clark \a\........................... NV..................... 13,780 50 3,567 7,034 51,676 1,226,454 2273
White Pine.......................... NV..................... 12,458 50 544 988 45,564 184,749 305
Lea................................. NM..................... 10,215 100 156 56 82,787 75,798 -8
Sublette............................ WY..................... 9,833 100 733 633 79,966 291,755 265
Maricopa............................ AZ..................... 9.544 400 3,026 657 284,502 849,455 199
Lincoln............................. WY..................... 8,362 100 906 806 65,110 248,087 281
Rio Arriba.......................... NM..................... 8,301 200 328 64 138,217 123,101 -11
Carbon.............................. WY..................... 8,073 100 214 114 64,019 59,903 -6
Rio Blanco.......................... CO..................... 6,871 200 669 235 113,709 203,855 79
Fremont............................. WY..................... 6,167 100 311 211 49,378 45,758 -7
Eureka.............................. NV..................... 5,095 50 230 360 18,691 37,803 102
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal................................................. 197,920 107 778 627 1,974,809 5,553,149 181
Clark County Sub-Zones.............. NV..................... 876 \b\ 14,001 3,567 -75 852,466 77,952 -91
==========================================================================================
Total.................................................... 198,796 ........... ........... ........... 2,827,275 5,631,101 99
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Entries for Clark County do not include rights-of-way in Clark County ``unique zones.''
\b\ 1987 Assigned Land Value for Clark County ``unique zones'' is a weighted average across 8 unique zones there.
While the land values in certain counties in New Mexico and Wyoming
increased modestly from 1987 to 2002, the land values in Clark County,
Nevada, as shown in Table 12, increased dramatically (7,034 percent)
during this time period. Much of this increase can be attributed to the
tremendous growth rate and demand for undeveloped land in and
surrounding Las Vegas, Nevada, the largest city in Clark County as well
as the state of Nevada. In recognition of these higher land values in
the Las Vegas area, a ``unique zone'' Per Acre Rent Schedule with 8
zones whose land values ranged from $4,000 to $75,000 per acre was
established in 1987 under the 1987 regulations. The annual per acre
rent values ranged from approximately $300 to $6,000 (in 2007). The BLM
used the ``unique zone'' Per Acre Rent Schedule (see Section I
Background of this preamble for additional information on the ``unique
zone'' Per Acre Rent Schedule) to assess rent ($853,000 in 2007) for
approximately 80 right-of-way grants in the Las Vegas area which were
issued within the ``unique zone'' areas prior to 2002. In addition,
another 225 rights-of-way were located within the Las Vegas ``unique
zone'' area, but the BLM used the 1987 Per Acre Rent Schedule to
determine annual rent for these rights-of-way in accordance with
Washington Office Instruction Memorandum 2002-172. Had the BLM used the
``unique zone'' rates to determine rent for these 225 grants, an
additional $2.4 million would have been collected in 2007 (based on an
average annual rent payment of $10,663 for each of the 80 right-of-way
grants subject to the ``unique zone'' rates in 2007). So instead of
$51,676 in assessed rent for linear rights-of-way in Clark County for
2007, as shown in Table 12, a more appropriate figure for comparison
purposes, using the ``unique zone'' rates for all 305 rights-of-way
located within these high land value areas, would have been
approximately $3.3 million. Under the Per Acre Rent Schedule of this
final rule, that figure would have then decreased to $1.23 million,
resulting in a 63 percent decrease in rental receipts, instead of the
2,273 percent increase as shown in Table 12. However, the actual
percent increase in rent receipts in Clark County is only 46 percent
when total
[[Page 65068]]
receipts collected from the previous rent schedules ($904,142) are
compared to what would have been collected using the Per Acre Rent
Schedule of this final rule for 2007 ($1,304,400).
In summary, the final rule will increase rental revenues collected
by the BLM and, conversely, increase costs to grant holders by
approximately $6.4 million, based on 2007 billing data. The BLM
assessed rent for rights-of-way on 373,000 acres of public land in 2007
(see Table 11). If this acreage had been billed only on an annual
basis, the BLM would have assessed rent in the amount of $5,088,433
using the previous Per Acre Rent Schedule. Under the final rule, the
BLM would have assessed rent in the amount of $11,512,757 (with no
phase-in provision), or an increase of $6,424,325. These increases in
rental receipts would have reasonably reflected the increase in land
values that also occurred from 1987 to 2002. Likewise, the BLM
estimates that the maximum amount that rental receipts will increase
under the final rule is an average of $14.7 million each year (plus
annual IPD GDP adjustments) when all authorizations and rent payment
periods are considered (using 2007 as a sample year). This amount
($14.7 million) is based on average estimated rental receipts of $21
million per year over a 5-year period (2009-2013), less the $6.3
million in actual rental receipts collected in 2007 for all
authorizations and rent payment periods billed ($21 million-$6.3
million = $14.7 million).
In addition to revising the previous Per Acre Rent Schedule, the
final rule makes minor revisions to parts 2800 and 2880 of the previous
regulations so that the final regulations are consistent with the
statutory rent schedule changes discussed above. There are also a
number of minor corrections and changes made in the final rule that are
not directly related to the rent schedule. These changes are limited in
scope and address trespass penalties, new rent payment options
(including how one-time payments are to be determined for perpetual
right-of-way grants and easements), annual rental payments, limited
phase-in provisions for all holders, and reimbursements of monitoring
costs and processing fees for leases and permits issued under 43 CFR
part 2920. These latter items correct some errors in the previous
regulations and clarify other regulations. All these changes are within
the scope of the BLM's existing authority to administer rights-of-way
under the FLPMA and the MLA and will have only minor economic impact.
b. This rule will not create serious inconsistencies or otherwise
interfere with other agencies' actions. Since 1987, the BLM and the FS
have both used the same Per Acre Rent Schedule to establish rent for
linear right-of-way facilities located on public land and NFS land. The
Act requires both the BLM and the FS to make the same revisions to the
1987 per acre rental fee zone value schedule by State, county, and type
of linear right-of-way use to reflect current values of land in each
zone. The BLM has worked closely with the FS in assuring the maximum
consistency possible between the policies of the two agencies with
respect to approving and administering linear rights-of-way, including
the assessment of rent for these facilities. The FS plans to adopt the
BLM Per Acre Rent Schedule.
c. The final rule will not materially affect entitlements, grants,
user fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their
recipients. This rule does increase rental fees, but only in amounts
necessary to ensure compliance with the Act. The increases in rental
fees will not be retroactive, but they will apply to new authorizations
and to existing grant-holders who hold grants subject to rent at the
grant's next rental due payment period. Flexible rent payment options
and phase-in provisions will significantly reduce any impact that
increased rental fees may have on grant-holders. Rent exemption and
reduction provisions found in the current rule still apply. However,
the final rule makes it clear that if an entity is found to be in
trespass on public land, the rental exemptions and/or waiver of rent
provisions will not apply to settlement of the trespass action.
d. The final rule will not raise novel legal or policy issues. The
Act requires the BLM and the FS to update and revise previous per acre
rent schedules to reflect current land values. Both agencies previously
collected rental fees for linear rights-of-way using a per acre rent
schedule established in 1987. The Act does not specify how to revise
the land values or what data should be used. The final rule uses
average per acre land and building values published every 5 years in
the NASS Census. Other Federal and state agencies regularly use the
NASS Census data when necessary to use average per acre land values for
a particular State or county. Congress, likewise, endorsed the use of
this data for rental determination purposes when it passed the
``National Forest Organizational Camp Fee Improvement Act of 2003''
(Public Law 108-7) (16 U.S.C. 6231). The BLM believes that the rental
fees arrived at by the use of the NASS Census data is the most
efficient and reasonable method of revising the previous Per Acre Rent
Schedule, as well as meeting other mandates under FLPMA and the MLA
that require that the U.S. receive fair market value of the use of the
public lands.
Clarity of the Regulations
Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations
that are simple and easy to understand. In the proposed rule, we
invited your comments on how to make these regulations easier to
understand, including answers to questions such as the following:
1. Are the requirements in the proposed regulations clearly stated?
2. Do the proposed regulations contain technical language or jargon
that interferes with their clarity?
3. Does the format of the proposed regulations (grouping and order
of sections, use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce their
clarity?
4. Would the regulations be easier to understand if they were
divided into more (but shorter) sections? (A ``section'' appears in
bold type and is preceded by the symbol ``Sec. '' and a numbered
heading, for example: Sec. 2806.20 What is the rent for a linear
right-of-way grant?).
5. Is the description of the proposed regulations in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this preamble helpful in
understanding the proposed regulations? How could this description be
more helpful in making the proposed regulations easier to understand?
We received no specific comments in response to the above 5
questions. However, we received several comments suggesting that we
clarify the language in proposed sections 2807.15 and 2886.15, which we
have accomplished in this final rule. In addition, one commenter
requested clarification of the meaning of the phrase ``When no
acceptable market information is available'' as used in proposed
section 2806.25(d) and asked whether the lack of acceptable market data
would allow the BLM to utilize a process to determine per acre land
values similar to that used in lower value Federal land acquisitions
known as ``waiver valuations.'' We provided that clarification in the
preamble discussion to that section.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
The BLM has determined that this final rule, which primarily
updates the previous linear rent schedule, is of an administrative,
financial, and/or procedural nature whose environmental effects are too
broad, speculative, or
[[Page 65069]]
conjectural to lend themselves to meaningful analysis and will later be
subject to the NEPA process, either collectively or case-by-case.
Therefore, it is categorically excluded from environmental review under
section 102(2)(C) of NEPA, pursuant to 516 Departmental Manual (DM),
Chapter 2, Appendix 1, Number 1.10. In addition, the final rule does
not meet any of the 12 criteria for extraordinary circumstances listed
in 516 DM, Chapter 2, Appendix 2. Pursuant to Council on Environmental
Quality regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and the environmental policies and
procedures of the Department of the Interior, the term ``categorical
exclusions'' means a category of actions which do not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and
that have been found to have no such effect in procedures adopted by a
Federal agency and for which neither an environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is required.
We have also examined this rule to determine whether it requires
consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16
U.S.C. 1532). The ESA requires an agency to consult with the Fish and
Wildlife Service or National Marine Fisheries Service to insure that
any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species or result in
the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
We have determined that this rule will have no effect on listed or
proposed species or on designated or proposed critical habitat under
the ESA and therefore consultation under section 7 of the ESA is not
required. Our determination is based in part on the fact that nothing
in the rule changes existing processes and procedures that ensure the
protection of listed or proposed species or designated or proposed
critical habitat. Existing processes and procedures have been in effect
since BLM promulgated right-of-way regulations in 1979-80. Any further
compliance with the ESA will occur when an application for a right-of-
way is filed with the BLM.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Congress enacted the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA), as
amended, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, to ensure that Government regulations do not
unnecessarily or disproportionately burden small entities. The RFA
requires a regulatory flexibility analysis if a rule would have a
significant economic impact, either detrimental or beneficial, on a
substantial number of small entities. The BLM has estimated that
approximately 18 percent of all applicants and grantees (approximately
5 percent of MLA applicants and grantees and approximately 23 percent
of FLPMA applicants and grantees) may qualify as small entities. As
discussed above, rental fees, in most cases, are not a significant cost
for the industries affected, including small entities.
Table 13 shows the small business size standards for industries
that may be affected by these rules. This table lists industry size
standards for eligibility for Small Business Administration (SBA)
programs from SBA regulations (see 13 CFR 121.201). The SBA size
standards are typically stated either as the average number of
employees, or the average annual receipts of a business concern.
Standards are grouped using the North American Industrial
Classification System 2002 (NAICS). This listing is based on
descriptions from the U.S. Bureau of the Census 2002 NAICS codes and is
not exhaustive.
Table 13--SBA Size Standards for Affected Industries as of July 31, 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS code Description Size standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
113110................................ Timber Tract Operations................. $6.5 million.
113210................................ Gathering of forest products............ $6.5 million.
113310................................ Logging................................. 500 employees.
211111................................ Crude petroleum and natural gas 500 employees.
extraction.
211112................................ Natural gas liquid extraction........... 500 employees.
221111................................ Hydroelectric power generation..........
221112................................ Fossil fuel electric power generation...
221113................................ Nuclear electric power generation.......
221119................................ Other electric power generation.........
221121................................ Electric Bulk Power Transmission and
Control.
221122................................ Electric Power Distribution............. Firm, including affiliates, is
primarily engaged in
generation, transmission, or
distribution of electric
energy for sale, and total
electric output for the
preceding fiscal year <= 4
million megawatt-hours.
221210................................ Natural Gas Distribution................ 500 employees.
221310................................ Water Supply and Distribution System.... $6.5 million.
486110................................ Pipeline Transportation: Crude Oil...... 1,500 employees.
486210................................ Pipeline Transportation: Natural Gas.... $6.5 million
486910................................ Pipeline Transportation: Refined 1,500 employees.
Petroleum Products.
486990................................ Pipeline Transportation: All other $21.5 million.
products.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The BLM does not officially track right-of-way costs, but grant
holders in 2003 estimated that construction costs for pipeline
facilities were between $300,000 (12'' pipeline) and $1.5 million per
mile (36'' pipeline); construction costs for rocked logging roads were
between $40,000/mile for a ridge top road to $150,000/mile for a full
bench road or an average of $70,000/mile for a road through moderate
terrain; and construction costs for electric distribution and
transmission lines were between $24,000/mile (24kV distribution line)
to $1 million/mile (500kV transmission line). Larger projects would
typically require more land area to site than minor projects. Since
rent is based on the number of acres that the right-of-way facility
encumbers, larger projects would involve higher rental payments than
would minor projects. However, compared to the cost of constructing a
typical right-of-way facility, total rent and the rental fee increases
under the final rule are relatively small (see 70 FR 21056 for further
information on typical project costs).
[[Page 65070]]
Any of the industries listed in Table 13 may hold right-of-way
grants with the BLM, under either FLPMA or MLA, as a part of their
business practices. For example, bulk electric power transmission firms
will use rights-of-way to distribute their electricity. Firms may be
eligible for various SBA programs, but the size-limit is specific to
each industry, and identified by the industry codes. The limit may be
based on gross sales, the number of employees, or other factors. It is
estimated that about 5.3 percent (or 1,416 of 26,711) of existing MLA
grantees may be eligible for SBA programs and about 22.9 percent (or
14,280 of 62,358) of FLPMA grantees may be eligible for SBA programs
(see 70 FR 21056). Whether they choose to join the SBA programs is
strictly an individual firm's decision.
The proportion of grantees eligible for SBA programs indicates that
there is an opportunity for small businesses in BLM's right-of-way
program. However, the burden of increased rental fees will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
or fall disproportionately on small businesses. Moreover, any entity
that believes that it might be adversely affected by the rental fee
increases to its FLPMA right-of-way grant may qualify for a waiver or
reduction of rental fees under any of the provisions, including
hardship, found at section 2806.15. Therefore, the BLM has determined
under the RFA that this final rule does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined at 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
This rule:
a. Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more. See the Executive Order 12866 discussion above.
b. Will not result in major cost or price increases for consumers,
industries, government agencies, or regions. As discussed above, when
compared to the cost of constructing a right-of-way project, the rental
fee increases contained in this rule are relatively small and therefore
will not cause any major increase in costs or prices. In addition, any
applicant or holder of a FLPMA authorization that believes that the
rental fee increases will cause difficulty may benefit from the rent
waiver or reduction provisions under section 2806.15, especially the
hardship provision.
c. Does not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. The
rule should result in no change in any of the above factors. See the
Executive Order 12866 discussion above regarding the economic effects
of the rental fee increases. In general, the rental fee increases are
small in comparison with the overall costs of constructing,
maintaining, operating, and terminating large projects located within
right-of-way areas. With the possible exception of MLA grants for
pipelines, the projects located on right-of-way grants support
domestic, not foreign, activities and do not involve products and
services that are exported. The MLA pipelines may transport oil and gas
and their related products destined for foreign markets, but the
overall increase in rental fees, compared to the cost of, and profits
from, running an oil and gas pipeline that would feed into a foreign
market, is minimal.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on state, local, or
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector, of $100
million or more per year; nor does this rule have a significant or
unique effect on small governments. The rule imposes no requirements
approaching $100 million annually on any of these entities. We have
already shown, in the previous paragraphs of this section of the
preamble, that this rule does not have effects approaching $100 million
per year on the economy. Therefore, the BLM is not required to prepare
a statement containing the information required by the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act at 2 U.S.C. 1532.
Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference With
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights (Takings)
The rule does not have takings implications and is not government
action capable of interfering with constitutionally protected property
rights. A right-of-way application is not private property. The BLM has
discretion under the governing statutes to issue a grant or not (see 30
U.S.C. 185(a) and 43 U.S.C. 1761(a)). Once a grant is issued, a
holder's continued use of the Federal land covered by the grant is
conditioned upon compliance with various statutes, regulations, and
terms and conditions, including the payment of rent. Consistent with
FLPMA and the MLA, violation of the relevant statutes, regulations, or
terms and conditions of the grant can result in termination of the
grant before the end of the grant's term. The holder of a grant
acknowledges this possibility in accepting a grant. Therefore, the
Department of the Interior has determined that the rule will not cause
a taking of private property or require further discussion of takings
implications under this Executive Order.
Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The rule will not have a substantial direct effect on the states,
on the relationship between the national government and the states, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the levels of
government. Qualifying states and local governments continue to be
exempt from paying rent for a right-of-way grant issued under FLPMA.
Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, the BLM has
determined that this rule does not have sufficient Federalism
implications to warrant preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform
Under Executive Order 12988, we have determined that this rule will
not unduly burden the judicial system and that it meets the
requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order.
Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
In accordance with Executive Order 13175, we have found that this
rule does not include policies that have tribal implications. The BLM
may only issue right-of-way grants across public lands that it manages
or across Federal lands held by two or more Federal agencies. Indian
tribes have jurisdiction over their own lands, subject to the
Secretary's trust responsibility. To our knowledge, no Indian tribes
are involved in any multi-agency grants.
Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
In accordance with Executive Order 13211, the BLM has determined
that the final rule is not a significant energy action. The rule is not
a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and is not
likely to have a significant effect on energy supply, distribution or
use, including a shortfall in supply or price increase. In addition,
the rule has not been designated as a significant energy action by the
Chief of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. However,
since the final rent schedule is based on average per acre land values
which have generally
[[Page 65071]]
increased over the past 20 years, rental receipts are expected to
increase in a like proportion, but still remain a minor component of
overall costs and/or rates. In addition, the rule preserves existing
rental exemption and waiver provisions for holders of FLPMA
authorizations, provides an initial phase-in period to all holders, and
provides more flexible rent payment options that were lacking in the
previous regulation.
Executive Order 13352, Facilitation of Cooperative Conservation
In accordance with Executive Order 13352, the BLM has determined
that this rule does not impede facilitating cooperative conservation;
takes appropriate account of and considers the interests of persons
with ownership or other legally recognized interests in land or other
natural resources; properly accommodates local participation in the
Federal decision-making process; and provides that the programs,
projects, and activities are consistent with protecting public health
and safety. This rule does not change any provision of the BLM's
previous right-of-way rule which facilitates cooperative conservation
in the authorization and administration of right-of-way facilities on
public lands. The rule maintains all alternatives for maximum
protection of right-of-way facilities when the land encumbered by the
facilities is proposed for transfer out of Federal ownership. The grant
holder will also have the opportunity to negotiate new terms and
conditions with the new land owner, if the holder so desires. The rule
does not reduce or eliminate any current provision that requires the
BLM to coordinate and consult with other affected and/or interested
parties in the granting or administering of right-of-way facilities on
public land, including the requirements that the BLM places on right-
of-way holders to protect public health and safety, as well as public
resources and environmental quality.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Office of Management and Budget has approved the information
collection requirements in the final rule under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and has assigned clearance number
1004-0189, which expires on November 30, 2008.
Authors
The principal authors of this rule are Bil Weigand, BLM Idaho State
Office, and Rick Stamm, BLM Washington Office, assisted by Ian Senio of
BLM's Division of Regulatory Affairs, Washington Office, and Michael
Hickey of the Office of the Solicitor.
List of Subjects
43 CFR Part 2800
Communications, Electric power, Highways and roads, Penalties,
Public lands and rights-of-way, and Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
43 CFR Part 2880
Administrative practice and procedures, Common carriers, Pipelines,
Public lands rights-of-way, and Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
43 CFR Part 2920
Penalties, Public lands, and Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: October 15, 2008.
C. Stephen Allred,
Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals Management.
0
Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the preamble and under the
authorities identified below, the BLM amends 43 CFR parts 2800, 2880,
and 2920 as set forth below:
PART 2800--RIGHTS-OF-WAY UNDER THE FEDERAL LAND POLICY MANAGEMENT
ACT
0
1. The authority citation for part 2800 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1733, 1740, 1763, and 1764.
Subpart 2805--Terms and Conditions of Grants
0
2. Amend Sec. 2805.11 by revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 2805.11 What does a grant contain?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) All grants, except those issued for a term of 3 years or less
and those issued in perpetuity, will expire on December 31 of the final
year of the grant.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 2805.14 by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 2805.14 What rights does a grant convey?
* * * * *
(f) Assign the grant to another, provided that you obtain the BLM's
prior written approval, unless your grant specifically states that that
such approval is unnecessary.
Subpart 2806--Rents
0
4. Amend Sec. 2806.14 by redesignating the introductory text and
paragraphs (a), (b), (b)(1), (b)(2), (c), and (d) as paragraphs (a)
introductory text, (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(2)(i), (a)(2)(ii), (a)(3), and
(a)(4), respectively, and by adding a new paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 2806.14 Under what circumstances am I exempt from paying rent?
* * * * *
(b) The exemptions in this section do not apply if you are in
trespass.
0
5. Revise Sec. 2806.20 to read as follows:
Sec. 2806.20 What is the rent for a linear right-of-way grant?
(a) Except as described in Sec. 2806.26 of this chapter, the BLM
will use the Per Acre Rent Schedule (see paragraph (c) of this section)
to calculate rent for all linear right-of-way authorizations,
regardless of the granting authority (FLPMA, MLA, and their
predecessors). Counties (or other geographical areas) are assigned to
an appropriate zone in accordance with Sec. 2806.21. The BLM will
adjust the per acre rent values in the schedule annually in accordance
with Sec. 2806.22(a), and it will revise the schedule at the end of
each 10-year period in accordance with Sec. 2806.22(b).
(b) The annual per acre rent for all types of linear right-of-way
facilities is the product of 4 factors: The per acre zone value
multiplied by the encumbrance factor multiplied by the rate of return
multiplied by the annual adjustment factor (see Sec. 2806.22(a)).
(c) You may obtain a copy of the current Per Acre Rent Schedule
from any BLM state or field office or by writing: Director, BLM, 1849 C
St., NW., Mail Stop 1000 LS, Washington, DC 20240. The BLM also posts
the current rent schedule on the BLM Homepage on the Internet at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.blm.gov.
0
6. Redesignate Sec. Sec. 2806.21, 2806.22, and 2806.23 as Sec. Sec.
2806.22, 2806.23, and 2806.24, respectively, and add new Sec. 2806.21
to read as follows:
Sec. 2806.21 When and how are counties or other geographical areas
assigned to a County Zone Number and Per Acre Zone Value?
Counties (or other geographical areas) are assigned to a County
Zone Number and Per Acre Zone Value based upon 80 percent of their
average per acre land and building value published in the Census of
Agriculture (Census) by the National Agricultural Statistics Service
(NASS). The initial assignment of counties to the zones will cover
years 2006 through 2010 of the Per Acre Rent Schedule and is based upon
data contained in the most recent NASS Census (2002). Subsequent re-
assignments of counties will occur every 5 years (in 2011 based upon
2007 NASS Census data, in 2016 based upon 2012 NASS Census data, and so
forth)
[[Page 65072]]
following the publication of the NASS Census.
0
7. Revise redesignated Sec. 2806.22 to read as follows:
Sec. 2806.22 When and how does the Per Acre Rent Schedule change?
(a) Each calendar year the BLM will adjust the per acre rent values
in Sec. 2806.20 for all types of linear right-of-way facilities in
each zone based on the average annual change in the IPD-GDP for the 10-
year period immediately preceding the year that the NASS Census data
becomes available. For example, the average annual change in the IP-GDP
from 1994 to 2003 (the 10-year period immediately preceding the year
(2004) that the 2002 NASS Census data became available) is 1.9 percent.
This annual adjustment factor is applied to years 2006 through 2015 of
the Per Acre Rent Schedule. Likewise, the average annual change in the
IPD-GDP from 2004 to 2013 (the 10-year period immediately preceding the
year (2014) when the 2012 NASS Census data will become available) will
be applied to years 2016 through 2025 of the Per Acre Rent Schedule.
(b) The BLM will review the NASS Census data from the 2012 NASS
Census, and each subsequent 10-year period, and as appropriate, revise
the number of county zones and the per acre zone values. Any revision
must include 100 percent of the number of counties and listed
geographical areas for all states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
and must reasonably reflect the increases or decreases in the average
per acre land and building values contained in the NASS Census.
0
8. Revise redesignated Sec. 2806.23 to read as follows:
Sec. 2806.23 How will the BLM calculate my rent for linear rights-of-
way the Per Acre Rent Schedule covers?
(a) Except as provided by Sec. Sec. 2806.25 and 2806.26, the BLM
calculates your rent by multiplying the rent per acre for the
appropriate county (or other geographical area) zone from the current
schedule by the number of acres (as rounded up to the nearest tenth of
an acre) in the right-of-way area that fall in each zone and
multiplying the result by the number of years in the rental payment
period (the length of time for which the holder is paying rent).
(b) The BLM will phase-in the initial implementation of the Per
Acre Rent Schedule (see Sec. 2806.20(c)) by reducing the 2009 per acre
rent by 25 percent.
(c) If the BLM has not previously used the rent schedule to
calculate your rent, we may do so after giving you reasonable written
notice.
0
9. Revise redesignated Sec. 2806.24 to read as follows:
Sec. 2806.24 How must I make rental payments for a linear grant?
(a) Term grants. For linear grants, except those issued in
perpetuity, you must make either nonrefundable annual payments or a
nonrefundable payment for more than 1 year, as follows:
(1) One-time payments. You may pay in advance the total rent amount
for the entire term of the grant or any remaining years.
(2) Multiple payments. If you choose not to make a one-time
payment, you must pay according to one of the following methods:
(i) Payments by individuals. If your annual rent is $100 or less,
you must pay at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant.
If your annual rent is greater than $100, you may pay annually or at
10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant. For example, if
you have a grant with a remaining term of 30 years, you may pay in
advance for 10 years, 20 years, or 30 years, but not any other multi-
year period.
(ii) Payments by all others. If your annual rent is $500 or less,
you must pay rent at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the
grant. If your annual rent is greater than $500, you may pay annually
or at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant.
(b) Perpetual grants. For linear grants issued in perpetuity
(except as noted in Sec. Sec. 2806.25 and 2806.26), you must make
either nonrefundable annual payments or a nonrefundable payment for
more than 1 year, as follows:
(1) Payments by individuals. If your annual rent is $100 or less,
you must pay at 10-year intervals, not to exceed 30 years. If your
annual rent is greater than $100, you may pay annually or at 10-year
intervals, not to exceed 30 years.
(2) Payments by all others. If your annual rent is $500 or less,
you must pay rent at 10-year intervals, not to exceed 30 years. If your
annual rent is greater than $500, you may pay annually or at 10-year
intervals, not to exceed 30 years.
(c) Proration of payments. The BLM considers the first partial
calendar year in the initial rental payment period (the length of time
for which the holder is paying rent) to be the first year of the term.
The BLM prorates the first year rental amount based on the number of
months left in the calendar year after the effective date of the grant.
0
10. Add new Sec. Sec. 2806.25 and 2806.26 to read as follows:
Sec. 2806.25 How may I make rental payments when land encumbered by
my perpetual linear grant (other than an easement issued under Sec.
2807.15(b)) is being transferred out of Federal ownership?
(a) One-time payment option for existing perpetual grants. If you
have a perpetual grant and the land your grant encumbers is being
transferred out of Federal ownership, you may choose to make a one-time
rental payment. The BLM will determine the one-time payment for a
perpetual grant by dividing the current annual rent for the subject
property by an overall capitalization rate calculated from market data,
where the overall capitalization rate is the difference between a
market yield rate and a percent annual rent increase as described in
the formula in paragraphs (a)(1), (2), and (3) of this section. The
formula for this calculation is: One-time Rental Payment = Annual Rent/
(Y-CR), where:
(1) Annual Rent = Current Annual Rent Applicable to the Subject
Property from the Per Acre Rent Schedule;
(2) Y = Yield Rate from the Per Acre Rent Schedule (5.27
percent); and
(3) CR = Annual Percent Change in Rent as Determined by the Most
Recent 10-Year Average of the difference in the IPD-GDP Index from
January of one year to January of the following year.
(b) One-time payment for grants converted to perpetual grants under
Sec. 2807.15(b). If the land your grant encumbers is being transferred
out of Federal ownership, and you request a conversion of your grant to
a perpetual right-of-way grant, you must make a one-time rental payment
in accordance with Sec. 2806.25(a).
(c) In paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, the annual rent is
determined from the Per Acre Rent Schedule (see Sec. 2806.20(c)) as
updated under Sec. 2806.22. However, the per acre zone value and zone
number used in this annual rental determination will be based on the
per acre land value from acceptable market information or the appraisal
report, if any, for the land transfer action and not the county average
per acre land and building value from the NASS Census. You may also
submit an appraisal report on your own initiative in accordance with
paragraph (d) of this section.
(d) When no acceptable market information is available and no
appraisal report has been completed for the land transfer action or
when the BLM requests it, you must:
(1) Prepare an appraisal report using Federal appraisal standards,
at your expense, that explains how you estimated the land value per
acre, the
[[Page 65073]]
rate of return, and the encumbrance factor; and
(2) Submit the appraisal report for consideration by the BLM State
Director with jurisdiction over the lands encumbered by your
authorization.
Sec. 2806.26 How may I make rental payments when land encumbered by
my perpetual easement issued under Sec. 2807.15(b) is being
transferred out of Federal ownership?
(a) The BLM will use the appraisal report for the land transfer
action (i.e., direct or indirect land sales, land exchanges, and other
land disposal actions) and other acceptable market information to
determine the one-time rental payment for a perpetual easement issued
under Sec. 2807.15(b).
(b) When no acceptable market information is available and no
appraisal report has been completed for the land transfer action or
when the BLM requests it, you must prepare an appraisal report as
required under Sec. 2806.25(d). You may also submit an appraisal
report on your own initiative in accordance with Sec. 2806.25(d).
Subpart 2807--Grant Administration and Operation
0
11. Amend Sec. 2807.15 by revising paragraph (b) and paragraph (c) to
read as follows:
Sec. 2807.15 How is grant administration affected if the land my
grant encumbers is transferred to another Federal agency or out of
Federal ownership?
* * * * *
(b) The BLM will provide reasonable notice to you if there is a
proposal to transfer the land your grant encumbers out of Federal
ownership. If you request, the BLM will negotiate new grant terms and
conditions with you. This may include increasing the term of your grant
to a perpetual grant or providing for an easement. These changes, if
any, become effective prior to the time the land is transferred out of
Federal ownership. The BLM may then, in conformance with existing
policies and procedures:
(1) Transfer the land subject to your grant or easement. In this
case, administration of your grant or easement for the lands BLM
formerly administered is transferred to the new owner of the land;
(2) Transfer the land, but BLM retains administration of your grant
or easement; or
(3) Reserve to the United States the land your grant or easement
encumbers, and BLM retains administration of your grant or easement.
(c) You and the new land owner may agree to negotiate new grant
terms and conditions any time after the land encumbered by your grant
is transferred out of Federal ownership.
PART 2880--RIGHTS-OF-WAY UNDER THE MINERAL LEASING ACT
0
12. The authority citation for part 2880 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 185 and 189.
Subpart 2885--Terms and Conditions of MLA Grants and TUPs
0
13. Amend Sec. 2885.11 by revising the first sentence of paragraph (a)
to read as follows:
Sec. 2885.11 What terms and conditions must I comply with?
(a) Duration. All grants, except those issued for a term of 3 years
or less, will expire on December 31 of the final year of the grant. * *
*
* * * * *
0
14. Amend Sec. 2885.12 by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 2885.12 What rights does a grant or TUP convey?
* * * * *
(e) Assign the grant or TUP to another, provided that you obtain
the BLM's prior written approval, unless your grant or TUP specifically
states that such approval is unnecessary.
0
15. Revise Sec. 2885.19 to read as follows:
Sec. 2885.19 What is the rent for a linear right-of-way grant?
(a) The BLM will use the Per Acre Rent Schedule (see paragraph (b)
of this section) to calculate the rent. Counties (or other geographical
areas) are assigned to a County Zone Number and Per Acre Zone Value
based upon 80 percent of their average per acre land and building value
published in the NASS Census. The initial assignment of counties to the
zones in the Per Acre Rent Schedule for the 5-year period from 2006 to
2010 is based upon data contained in the most recent NASS Census
(2002). Subsequent assignments of counties will occur every 5 years
following the publication of the NASS Census. The Per Acre Rent
Schedule is also adjusted periodically as follows:
(1) Each calendar year the BLM will adjust the per acre rent values
in Sec. Sec. 2806.20 and 2885.19(b) for all types of linear right-of-
way facilities in each zone based on the average annual change in the
IPD-GDP for the 10-year period immediately preceding the year that the
NASS Census data becomes available. For example, the average annual
change in the IPD-GDP from 1994 to 2003 (the 10-year period immediately
preceding the year (2004) that the 2002 NASS Census data became
available) is 1.9 percent. This annual adjustment factor is applied to
years 2006 through 2015 of the Per Acre Rent Schedule. Likewise, the
average annual change in the IPD-GDP from 2004 to 2013 (the 10-year
period immediately preceding the year (2014) when the 2012 NASS Census
data will become available) will be applied to years 2016 through 2025
of the Per Acre Rent Schedule.
(2) The BLM will review the NASS Census data from the 2012 NASS
Census, and each subsequent 10-year period, and as appropriate, revise
the number of county zones and the per acre zone values. Any revision
must include 100 percent of the number of counties and listed
geographical areas for all states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
and must reasonably reflect the increases or decreases in the average
per acre land and building values contained in the NASS Census.
(b) You may obtain a copy of the current Per Acre Rent Schedule
from any BLM State Office or field office or by writing: Director, BLM,
1849 C St., NW., Mail Stop 1000 LS, Washington, DC 20240. The BLM also
posts the current rent schedule on the BLM Homepage on the Internet at
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/leaving.cgi?from=leavingFR.html&log=linklog&to=http://www.blm.gov.
0
16. Revise Sec. 2885.20 to read as follows:
Sec. 2885.20 How will the BLM calculate my rent for linear rights-of-
way the Per Acre Rent Schedule covers?
(a) Except as provided by Sec. 2885.22, the BLM calculates your
rent by multiplying the rent per acre for the appropriate county (or
other geographical area) zone from the current schedule by the number
of acres (as rounded up to the nearest tenth of an acre) in the right-
of-way or TUP area that fall in each zone and multiplying the result by
the number of years in the rental payment period (the length of time
for which the holder is paying rent).
(b) Phase-in provisions:
(1) The BLM will phase-in the initial implementation of the Per
Acre Rent Schedule (see Sec. 2885.19(b)) by reducing the 2009 per acre
rent by 25 percent.
(2) If, as the result of any revisions made to the Per Acre Rent
Schedule under Sec. 2885.19(a)(2), the payment of your new annual
rental amount would cause you undue hardship, you may qualify for a 2-
year phase-in period if you are a small business entity as that term is
defined in Small Business
[[Page 65074]]
Administration regulations and if it is in the public interest. The BLM
will require you to submit information to support your claim. If
approved by the BLM State Director, payment of the amount in excess of
the previous year's rent may be phased-in by equal increments over a 2-
year period. In addition, the BLM will adjust the total calculated rent
for year 2 of the phase-in period by the annual index provided by Sec.
2885.19(a)(1).
(c) If the BLM has not previously used the rent schedule to
calculate your rent, we may do so after giving you reasonable written
notice.
0
17. Revise Sec. 2885.21 to read as follows:
Sec. 2885.21 How must I make rental payments for a linear grant or
TUP?
(a) Term grants or TUPs. For TUPs you must make a one-time
nonrefundable payment for the term of the TUP. For grants, except those
that have been issued in perpetuity, you must make either nonrefundable
annual payments or a nonrefundable payment for more than 1 year, as
follows:
(1) One-time payments. You may pay in advance the total rent amount
for the entire term of the grant or any remaining years.
(2) Multiple payments. If you choose not to make a one-time
payment, you must pay according to one of the following methods:
(i) Payments by individuals. If your annual rent is $100 or less,
you must pay at 10-year intervals not to exceed the term of the grant.
If your annual rent is greater than $100, you may pay annually or at
10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant. For example, if
you have a grant with a remaining term of 30 years, you may pay in
advance for 10 years, 20 years, or 30 years, but not any other multi-
year period.
(ii) Payments by all others. If your annual rent is $500 or less,
you must pay rent at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the
grant. If your annual rent is greater than $500, you may pay annually
or at 10-year intervals, not to exceed the term of the grant.
(b) Perpetual grants issued prior to November 16, 1973. Except as
provided by Sec. 2885.22(a), you must make either nonrefundable annual
payments or a nonrefundable payment for more than 1 year, as follows:
(1) Payments by individuals. If your annual rent is $100 or less,
you must pay at 10-year intervals, not to exceed 30 years. If your
annual rent is greater than $100, you may pay annually or at 10-year
intervals, not to exceed 30 years.
(2) Payments by all others. If your annual rent is $500 or less,
you must pay rent at 10-year intervals, not to exceed 30 years. If your
annual rent is greater than $500, you may pay annually or at 10-year
intervals, not to exceed 30 years.
(c) Proration of payments. The BLM considers the first partial
calendar year in the initial rental payment period (the length of time
for which the holder is paying rent) to be the first year of the term.
The BLM prorates the first year rental amount based on the number of
months left in the calendar year after the effective date of the grant.
0
18. Redesignate Sec. Sec. 2885.22, 2885.23, and 2885.24 as Sec. Sec.
2885.23, 2885.24, and 2885.25, respectively, and add new Sec. 2885.22
to read as follows:
Sec. 2885.22 How may I make rental payments when land encumbered by
my term or perpetual linear grant is being transferred out of Federal
ownership?
(a) One-time payment option for existing perpetual grants issued
prior to November 16, 1973. If you have a perpetual grant and the land
your grant encumbers is being transferred out of Federal ownership, you
may choose to make a one-time rental payment. The BLM will determine
the one-time payment for perpetual right-of-way grants by dividing the
current annual rent for the subject property by an overall
capitalization rate calculated from market data, where the overall
capitalization rate is the difference between a market yield rate and a
percent annual rent increase as described in the formula in paragraphs
(a)(1), (2), and (3) of this section. The formula for this calculation
is: One-time Payment = Annual Rent/(Y-CR), where:
(1) Annual Rent = Current Annual Rent Applicable to the Subject
Property from the Per Acre Rent Schedule;
(2) Y = Yield Rate from the Per Acre Rent Schedule (5.27
percent); and
(3) CR = Annual Percent Change in Rent as Determined by the Most
Recent 10-Year Average of the difference in the IPD-GDP Index from
January of one year to January of the following year.
(b) In paragraph (a) of this section, the annual rent is determined
from the Per Acre Rent Schedule (see Sec. 2885.19(b)), as updated
under Sec. 2885.19(a)(1) and(2). However, the per acre zone value and
zone number used in this annual rental determination will be based on
the per acre land value from acceptable market information or an
appraisal report, if any, for the land transfer action and not the
county average per acre land and building value from the NASS Census.
You may also submit an appraisal report on your own initiative in
accordance with Sec. 2806.25(d) of this chapter.
(c) When no acceptable market information is available and no
appraisal report has been completed for the land transfer action, or
when the BLM requests it, you must prepare an appraisal report as
required under Sec. 2806.25(d) of this chapter.
(d) Term Grant. If the land your grant encumbers is being
transferred out of Federal ownership, you may pay in advance the total
rent amount for the entire term of the grant or any remaining years.
The BLM will use the annual rent calculated from the Per Acre Rent
Schedule multiplied by the number of years in the rent payment period
(the length of time for which the holder is paying rent) to determine
the one-time rent. However, this amount must not exceed the one-time
rent payment for a perpetual grant as determined under paragraphs (a)
and (b) of this section.
Subpart 2886--Operations On MLA Grants and TUPs
0
19. Amend Sec. 2886.15 by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 2886.15 How is grant or TUP administration affected if the BLM
land my grant or TUP encumbers is transferred to another Federal agency
or out of Federal ownership?
* * * * *
(b) The BLM will provide reasonable notice to you if there is a
proposal to transfer the BLM land your grant or TUP encumbers out of
Federal ownership. If you request, the BLM will negotiate new grant or
TUP terms and conditions with you. This may include increasing the term
of your grant to a 30-year term or replacing your TUP with a grant.
These changes, if any, become effective prior to the time the land is
transferred out of Federal ownership. The BLM may then, in conformance
with existing policies and procedures:
(1) Transfer the land subject to your grant or TUP. In this case,
administration of your grant or TUP for the lands BLM formerly
administered is transferred to the new owner of the land;
(2) Transfer the land, but BLM retains administration of your grant
or TUP; or
(3) Reserve to the United States the land your grant or TUP
encumbers, and BLM retains administration of your grant or TUP.
(c) You and the new land owner may agree to negotiate new grant or
TUP terms and conditions any time after the land encumbered by your
grant or TUP is transferred out of Federal ownership.
[[Page 65075]]
Subpart 2888--Trespass
0
20. Amend Sec. 2888.10 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 2888.10 What is trespass?
* * * * *
(c) The BLM will administer trespass actions for grants and TUPs as
set forth in Sec. Sec. 2808.10(c), and 2808.11 of this chapter.
* * * * *
PART 2920--LEASES, PERMITS, AND EASEMENTS
0
21. The authority citation for part 2920 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1740.
Subpart 2920--Leases, Permits, and Easements: General Provisions
0
22. Amend Sec. 2920.6(b) by revising the second sentence of paragraph
(b) to read as follows:
Sec. 2920.6 Reimbursement of Costs.
* * * * *
(b) * * * The reimbursement of costs shall be in accordance with
the provisions of Sec. Sec. 2804.14 and 2805.16 of this chapter.
* * * * *
0
23. Amend Sec. 2920.8 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 2920.8 Fees.
* * * * *
(b) Processing and monitoring fee. Each request for renewal,
transfer, or assignment of a lease or easement shall be accompanied by
a non-refundable processing and monitoring fee determined in accordance
with the provisions of Sec. Sec. 2804.14 and 2805.16 of this chapter.
Note: The following adjusted 2002 NASS Census table of per acre
land and building value and rent schedule zones is printed for
information only and will not appear in Title 43 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. The 2002 NASS Census per acre land and building
value for each county has been reduced by 20 percent. Please see the
discussion of section 2806.20 for further explanation. The 20
percent reduction represents the total value of all irrigated acres,
plus acres in the ``other'' category (which includes buildings,
roads, ponds, and wasteland) to total farm real-estate value.
Counties will be re-assigned to the appropriate rent schedule zone
in 2011 based upon the adjusted 2007 NASS Census per acre land and
building value.
Adjusted 2002 per Acre Land and Building (L/B) Value and Rent Schedule Zone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
80%--2002 L/B Rent schedule
State County values zone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama...................................... Autauga........................ $1,503 5
Alabama...................................... Baldwin........................ 2,002 6
Alabama...................................... Barbour........................ 958 3
Alabama...................................... Bibb........................... 1,370 4
Alabama...................................... Blount......................... 2,045 6
Alabama...................................... Bullock........................ 1,146 4
Alabama...................................... Butler......................... 1,238 4
Alabama...................................... Calhoun........................ 2,078 6
Alabama...................................... Chambers....................... 795 3
Alabama...................................... Cherokee....................... 1,234 4
Alabama...................................... Chilton........................ 1,437 4
Alabama...................................... Choctaw........................ 1,026 4
Alabama...................................... Clarke......................... 1,042 4
Alabama...................................... Clay........................... 1,112 4
Alabama...................................... Cleburne....................... 1,537 5
Alabama...................................... Coffee......................... 961 3
Alabama...................................... Colbert........................ 1,104 4
Alabama...................................... Conecuh........................ 887 3
Alabama...................................... Coosa.......................... 1,080 4
Alabama...................................... Covington...................... 1,293 4
Alabama...................................... Crenshaw....................... 1,064 4
Alabama...................................... Cullman........................ 2,534 6
Alabama...................................... Dale........................... 1,138 4
Alabama...................................... Dallas......................... 938 3
Alabama...................................... DeKalb......................... 1,914 5
Alabama...................................... Elmore......................... 1,574 5
Alabama...................................... Escambia....................... 1,141 4
Alabama...................................... Etowah......................... 2,285 6
Alabama...................................... Fayette........................ 886 3
Alabama...................................... Franklin....................... 1,132 4
Alabama...................................... Geneva......................... 1,210 4
Alabama...................................... Greene......................... 882 3
Alabama...................................... Hale........................... 931 3
Alabama...................................... Henry.......................... 959 3
Alabama...................................... Houston........................ 1,074 4
Alabama...................................... Jackson........................ 1,758 5
Alabama...................................... Jefferson...................... 2,086 6
Alabama...................................... Lamar.......................... 929 3
Alabama...................................... Lauderdale..................... 1,446 4
Alabama...................................... Lawrence....................... 1,373 4
Alabama...................................... Lee............................ 1,824 5
Alabama...................................... Limestone...................... 1,770 5
Alabama...................................... Lowndes........................ 915 3
Alabama...................................... Macon.......................... 1,052 4
Alabama...................................... Madison........................ 1,729 5
Alabama...................................... Marengo........................ 801 3
[[Page 65076]]
Alabama...................................... Marion......................... 1,187 4
Alabama...................................... Marshall....................... 2,180 6
Alabama...................................... Mobile......................... 2,689 6
Alabama...................................... Monroe......................... 1,094 4
Alabama...................................... Montgomery..................... 1,558 5
Alabama...................................... Morgan......................... 2,250 6
Alabama...................................... Perry.......................... 764 3
Alabama...................................... Pickens........................ 1,002 4
Alabama...................................... Pike........................... 1,138 4
Alabama...................................... Randolph....................... 1,518 5
Alabama...................................... Russell........................ 1,043 4
Alabama...................................... Shelby......................... 2,236 6
Alabama...................................... St. Clair...................... 1,891 5
Alabama...................................... Sumter......................... 814 3
Alabama...................................... Talladega...................... 2,054 6
Alabama...................................... Tallapoosa..................... 1,158 4
Alabama...................................... Tuscaloosa..................... 1,578 5
Alabama...................................... Walker......................... 1,385 4
Alabama...................................... Washington..................... 1,194 4
Alabama...................................... Wilcox......................... 810 3
Alabama...................................... Winston........................ 1,510 5
Alaska....................................... Aleutian Islands Area.......... 86 1
Alaska....................................... Anchorage Area................. 1,839 5
Alaska....................................... Fairbanks Area................. 524 3
Alaska....................................... Juneau Area.................... 35,743 11
Alaska....................................... Kenai Peninsula................ 1,130 4
Arizona...................................... Apache......................... 116 1
Arizona...................................... Cochise........................ 505 3
Arizona...................................... Coconino....................... 129 1
Arizona...................................... Gila........................... 220 1
Arizona...................................... Graham......................... 384 2
Arizona...................................... Greenlee....................... 1,204 4
Arizona...................................... La Paz......................... 503 3
Arizona...................................... Maricopa....................... 2,421 6
Arizona...................................... Mohave......................... 348 2
Arizona...................................... Navajo......................... 143 1
Arizona...................................... Pima........................... 236 1
Arizona...................................... Pinal.......................... 984 3
Arizona...................................... Santa Cruz..................... 1,147 4
Arizona...................................... Yavapai........................ 497 2
Arizona...................................... Yuma........................... 3,635 7
Arkansas..................................... Arkansas....................... 1,120 4
Arkansas..................................... Ashley......................... 1,091 4
Arkansas..................................... Baxter......................... 1,358 4
Arkansas..................................... Benton......................... 2,425 6
Arkansas..................................... Boone.......................... 1,447 4
Arkansas..................................... Bradley........................ 1,518 5
Arkansas..................................... Calhoun........................ 1,022 4
Arkansas..................................... Carroll........................ 1,336 4
Arkansas..................................... Chicot......................... 937 3
Arkansas..................................... Clark.......................... 1,145 4
Arkansas..................................... Clay........................... 1,301 4
Arkansas..................................... Cleburne....................... 1,378 4
Arkansas..................................... Cleveland...................... 1,756 5
Arkansas..................................... Columbia....................... 1,247 4
Arkansas..................................... Conway......................... 1,338 4
Arkansas..................................... Craighead...................... 1,376 4
Arkansas..................................... Crawford....................... 1,406 4
Arkansas..................................... Crittenden..................... 1,032 4
Arkansas..................................... Cross.......................... 1,108 4
Arkansas..................................... Dallas......................... 1,043 4
Arkansas..................................... Desha.......................... 882 3
Arkansas..................................... Drew........................... 1,004 4
Arkansas..................................... Faulkner....................... 1,458 4
Arkansas..................................... Franklin....................... 1,271 4
Arkansas..................................... Fulton......................... 815 3
Arkansas..................................... Garland........................ 1,808 5
Arkansas..................................... Grant.......................... 1,373 4
Arkansas..................................... Greene......................... 1,245 4
Arkansas..................................... Hempstead...................... 1,117 4
Arkansas..................................... Hot Spring..................... 1,242 4
[[Page 65077]]
Arkansas..................................... Howard......................... 1,318 4
Arkansas..................................... Independence................... 994 3
Arkansas..................................... Izard.......................... 922 3
Arkansas..................................... Jackson........................ 947 3
Arkansas..................................... Jefferson...................... 973 3
Arkansas..................................... Johnson........................ 1,787 5
Arkansas..................................... Lafayette...................... 854 3
Arkansas..................................... Lawrence....................... 1,020 4
Arkansas..................................... Lee............................ 826 3
Arkansas..................................... Lincoln........................ 917 3
Arkansas..................................... Little River................... 897 3
Arkansas..................................... Logan.......................... 1,218 4
Arkansas..................................... Lonoke......................... 1,111 4
Arkansas..................................... Madison........................ 1,097 4
Arkansas..................................... Marion......................... 1,050 4
Arkansas..................................... Miller......................... 836 3
Arkansas..................................... Mississippi.................... 1,081 4
Arkansas..................................... Monroe......................... 935 3
Arkansas..................................... Montgomery..................... 1,199 4
Arkansas..................................... Nevada......................... 860 3
Arkansas..................................... Newton......................... 1,196 4
Arkansas..................................... Ouachita....................... 1,142 4
Arkansas..................................... Perry.......................... 1,418 4
Arkansas..................................... Phillips....................... 836 3
Arkansas..................................... Pike........................... 1,430 4
Arkansas..................................... Poinsett....................... 1,272 4
Arkansas..................................... Polk........................... 1,370 4
Arkansas..................................... Pope........................... 1,557 5
Arkansas..................................... Prairie........................ 996 3
Arkansas..................................... Pulaski........................ 1,414 4
Arkansas..................................... Randolph....................... 1,033 4
Arkansas..................................... Saline......................... 1,914 5
Arkansas..................................... Scott.......................... 1,267 4
Arkansas..................................... Searcy......................... 795 3
Arkansas..................................... Sebastian...................... 1,717 5
Arkansas..................................... Sevier......................... 1,358 4
Arkansas..................................... Sharp.......................... 818 3
Arkansas..................................... St. Francis.................... 974 3
Arkansas..................................... Stone.......................... 810 3
Arkansas..................................... Union.......................... 1,710 5
Arkansas..................................... Van Buren...................... 1,140 4
Arkansas..................................... Washington..................... 2,223 6
Arkansas..................................... White.......................... 1,269 4
Arkansas..................................... Woodruff....................... 908 3
Arkansas..................................... Yell........................... 1,022 4
California................................... Alameda........................ 2,230 6
California................................... Alpine......................... 2,000 5
California................................... Amador......................... 1,553 5
California................................... Butte.......................... 3,521 7
California................................... Calaveras...................... 1,433 4
California................................... Colusa......................... 2,109 6
California................................... Contra Costa................... 6,435 8
California................................... Del Norte...................... 3,433 7
California................................... El Dorado...................... 2,277 6
California................................... Fresno......................... 2,890 6
California................................... Glenn.......................... 1,917 5
California................................... Humboldt....................... 950 3
California................................... Imperial....................... 2,381 6
California................................... Inyo........................... 777 3
California................................... Kern........................... 1,453 4
California................................... Kings.......................... 2,914 6
California................................... Lake........................... 3,985 7
California................................... Lassen......................... 555 3
California................................... Los Angeles.................... 12,435 9
California................................... Madera......................... 2,496 6
California................................... Marin.......................... 2,926 6
California................................... Mariposa....................... 804 3
California................................... Mendocino...................... 1,877 5
California................................... Merced......................... 3,061 7
California................................... Modoc.......................... 554 3
California................................... Mono........................... 1,249 4
[[Page 65078]]
California................................... Monterey....................... 2,598 6
California................................... Napa........................... 15,480 9
California................................... Nevada......................... 2,734 6
California................................... Orange......................... 8,529 8
California................................... Placer......................... 3,879 7
California................................... Plumas......................... 818 3
California................................... Riverside...................... 3,864 7
California................................... Sacramento..................... 3,588 7
California................................... San Benito..................... 1,502 5
California................................... San Bernardino................. 1,715 5
California................................... San Diego...................... 6,108 8
California................................... San Francisco.................. 25,791 10
California................................... San Joaquin.................... 5,338 8
California................................... San Luis Obispo................ 2,141 6
California................................... San Mateo...................... 4,783 7
California................................... Santa Barbara.................. 2,947 6
California................................... Santa Clara.................... 2,310 6
California................................... Santa Cruz..................... 7,468 8
California................................... Shasta......................... 1,386 4
California................................... Sierra......................... 1,210 4
California................................... Siskiyou....................... 1,148 4
California................................... Solano......................... 3,067 7
California................................... Sonoma......................... 8,846 8
California................................... Stanislaus..................... 4,854 7
California................................... Sutter......................... 3,251 7
California................................... Tehama......................... 1,326 4
California................................... Trinity........................ 511 3
California................................... Tulare......................... 3,159 7
California................................... Tuolumne....................... 1,331 4
California................................... Ventura........................ 7,071 8
California................................... Yolo........................... 2,916 6
California................................... Yuba........................... 2,755 6
Colorado..................................... Adams.......................... 721 3
Colorado..................................... Alamosa........................ 965 3
Colorado..................................... Arapahoe....................... 682 3
Colorado..................................... Archuleta...................... 1,022 4
Colorado..................................... Baca........................... 234 1
Colorado..................................... Bent........................... 256 2
Colorado..................................... Boulder........................ 6,111 8
Colorado..................................... Broomfield*.................... 605 3
Colorado..................................... Chaffee........................ 1,674 5
Colorado..................................... Cheyenne....................... 259 2
Colorado..................................... Clear Creek.................... 1,332 4
Colorado..................................... Conejos........................ 670 3
Colorado..................................... Costilla....................... 401 2
Colorado..................................... Crowley........................ 226 1
Colorado..................................... Custer......................... 1,242 4
Colorado..................................... Delta.......................... 1,674 5
Colorado..................................... Denver*........................ 605 3
Colorado..................................... Dolores........................ 757 3
Colorado..................................... Douglas........................ 2,452 6
Colorado..................................... Eagle.......................... 1,207 4
Colorado..................................... El Paso........................ 704 3
Colorado..................................... Elbert......................... 555 3
Colorado..................................... Fremont........................ 835 3
Colorado..................................... Garfield....................... 1,034 4
Colorado..................................... Gilpin......................... 2,230 6
Colorado..................................... Grand.......................... 965 3
Colorado..................................... Gunnison....................... 1,482 4
Colorado..................................... Hinsdale....................... 2,341 6
Colorado..................................... Huerfano....................... 343 2
Colorado..................................... Jackson........................ 416 2
Colorado..................................... Jefferson...................... 3,917 7
Colorado..................................... Kiowa.......................... 246 1
Colorado..................................... Kit Carson..................... 371 2
Colorado..................................... La Plata....................... 816 3
Colorado..................................... Lake........................... 1,105 4
Colorado..................................... Larimer........................ 1,849 5
Colorado..................................... Las Animas..................... 194 1
Colorado..................................... Lincoln........................ 201 1
Colorado..................................... Logan.......................... 448 2
[[Page 65079]]
Colorado..................................... Mesa........................... 1,141 4
Colorado..................................... Mineral........................ 1,250 4
Colorado..................................... Moffat......................... 333 2
Colorado..................................... Montezuma...................... 413 2
Colorado..................................... Montrose....................... 944 3
Colorado..................................... Morgan......................... 641 3
Colorado..................................... Otero.......................... 306 2
Colorado..................................... Ouray.......................... 1,204 4
Colorado..................................... Park........................... 627 3
Colorado..................................... Phillips....................... 574 3
Colorado..................................... Pitkin......................... 4,741 7
Colorado..................................... Prowers........................ 334 2
Colorado..................................... Pueblo......................... 393 2
Colorado..................................... Rio Blanco..................... 535 3
Colorado..................................... Rio Grande..................... 1,462 4
Colorado..................................... Routt.......................... 1,512 5
Colorado..................................... Saguache....................... 567 3
Colorado..................................... San Juan*...................... 605 3
Colorado..................................... San Miguel..................... 770 3
Colorado..................................... Sedgwick....................... 588 3
Colorado..................................... Summit......................... 1,413 4
Colorado..................................... Teller......................... 1,027 4
Colorado..................................... Washington..................... 334 2
Colorado..................................... Weld........................... 1,103 4
Colorado..................................... Yuma........................... 458 2
Connecticut.................................. Fairfield...................... 20,931 10
Connecticut.................................. Litchfield..................... 6,889 8
Connecticut.................................. Middlesex...................... 9,966 8
Connecticut.................................. New Haven...................... 10,904 9
Connecticut.................................. New London..................... 5,511 8
Connecticut.................................. Tolland........................ 4,532 7
Connecticut.................................. Windham........................ 5,262 8
Delaware..................................... Kent........................... 2,798 6
Delaware..................................... New Castle..................... 4,545 7
Delaware..................................... Sussex......................... 3,161 7
Florida...................................... Alachua........................ 2,578 6
Florida...................................... Baker.......................... 3,163 7
Florida...................................... Bay............................ 2,101 6
Florida...................................... Bradford....................... 1,988 5
Florida...................................... Brevard........................ 1,908 5
Florida...................................... Broward........................ 16,338 9
Florida...................................... Calhoun........................ 1,277 4
Florida...................................... Charlotte...................... 1,381 4
Florida...................................... Citrus......................... 1,998 5
Florida...................................... Clay........................... 1,986 5
Florida...................................... Collier........................ 2,128 6
Florida...................................... Columbia....................... 1,212 4
Florida...................................... Dade........................... 7,781 8
Florida...................................... DeSoto......................... 1,932 5
Florida...................................... Dixie.......................... 1,442 4
Florida...................................... Duval.......................... 4,849 7
Florida...................................... Escambia....................... 1,906 5
Florida...................................... Flagler........................ 1,307 4
Florida...................................... Franklin....................... 932 3
Florida...................................... Gadsden........................ 1,937 5
Florida...................................... Gilchrist...................... 1,858 5
Florida...................................... Glades......................... 1,479 4
Florida...................................... Gulf........................... 1,509 5
Florida...................................... Hamilton....................... 1,135 4
Florida...................................... Hardee......................... 1,873 5
Florida...................................... Hendry......................... 3,077 7
Florida...................................... Hernando....................... 4,074 7
Florida...................................... Highlands...................... 1,805 5
Florida...................................... Hillsborough................... 4,328 7
Florida...................................... Holmes......................... 1,288 4
Florida...................................... Indian River................... 2,375 6
Florida...................................... Jackson........................ 1,182 4
Florida...................................... Jefferson...................... 1,480 4
Florida...................................... Lafayette...................... 1,074 4
Florida...................................... Lake........................... 3,432 7
Florida...................................... Lee............................ 2,634 6
[[Page 65080]]
Florida...................................... Leon........................... 1,668 5
Florida...................................... Levy........................... 1,519 5
Florida...................................... Liberty........................ 1,093 4
Florida...................................... Madison........................ 1,229 4
Florida...................................... Manatee........................ 2,514 6
Florida...................................... Marion......................... 3,994 7
Florida...................................... Martin......................... 2,083 6
Florida...................................... Monroe......................... 16,556 9
Florida...................................... Nassau......................... 3,818 7
Florida...................................... Okaloosa....................... 2,031 6
Florida...................................... Okeechobee..................... 1,630 5
Florida...................................... Orange......................... 3,145 7
Florida...................................... Osceola........................ 1,352 4
Florida...................................... Palm Beach..................... 2,678 6
Florida...................................... Pasco.......................... 3,090 7
Florida...................................... Pinellas....................... 25,386 10
Florida...................................... Polk........................... 2,319 6
Florida...................................... Putnam......................... 1,984 5
Florida...................................... Santa Rosa..................... 2,119 6
Florida...................................... Sarasota....................... 2,396 6
Florida...................................... Seminole....................... 4,910 7
Florida...................................... St. Johns...................... 3,452 7
Florida...................................... St. Lucie...................... 2,591 6
Florida...................................... Sumter......................... 1,924 5
Florida...................................... Suwannee....................... 2,002 6
Florida...................................... Taylor......................... 1,034 4
Florida...................................... Union.......................... 1,054 4
Florida...................................... Volusia........................ 3,486 7
Florida...................................... Wakulla........................ 2,313 6
Florida...................................... Walton......................... 1,511 5
Florida...................................... Washington..................... 1,830 5
Georgia...................................... Appling........................ 1,253 4
Georgia...................................... Atkinson....................... 1,135 4
Georgia...................................... Bacon.......................... 1,744 5
Georgia...................................... Baker.......................... 1,401 4
Georgia...................................... Baldwin........................ 1,875 5
Georgia...................................... Banks.......................... 4,026 7
Georgia...................................... Barrow......................... 4,628 7
Georgia...................................... Bartow......................... 2,331 6
Georgia...................................... Ben Hill....................... 1,146 4
Georgia...................................... Berrien........................ 1,344 4
Georgia...................................... Bibb........................... 1,883 5
Georgia...................................... Bleckley....................... 1,318 4
Georgia...................................... Brantley....................... 1,282 4
Georgia...................................... Brooks......................... 1,282 4
Georgia...................................... Bryan.......................... 1,350 4
Georgia...................................... Bulloch........................ 1,303 4
Georgia...................................... Burke.......................... 1,075 4
Georgia...................................... Butts.......................... 1,629 5
Georgia...................................... Calhoun........................ 1,038 4
Georgia...................................... Camden......................... 1,292 4
Georgia...................................... Candler........................ 1,083 4
Georgia...................................... Carroll........................ 3,118 7
Georgia...................................... Catoosa........................ 3,102 7
Georgia...................................... Charlton....................... 1,546 5
Georgia...................................... Chatham........................ 1,650 5
Georgia...................................... Chattahoochee.................. 1,181 4
Georgia...................................... Chattooga...................... 1,359 4
Georgia...................................... Cherokee....................... 6,686 8
Georgia...................................... Clarke......................... 3,274 7
Georgia...................................... Clay........................... 822 3
Georgia...................................... Clayton........................ 4,351 7
Georgia...................................... Clinch......................... 1,354 4
Georgia...................................... Cobb........................... 7,290 8
Georgia...................................... Coffee......................... 1,267 4
Georgia...................................... Colquitt....................... 1,266 4
Georgia...................................... Columbia....................... 3,238 7
Georgia...................................... Cook........................... 1,491 4
Georgia...................................... Coweta......................... 4,432 7
Georgia...................................... Crawford....................... 1,594 5
Georgia...................................... Crisp.......................... 1,396 4
[[Page 65081]]
Georgia...................................... Dade........................... 1,649 5
Georgia...................................... Dawson......................... 3,659 7
Georgia...................................... Decatur........................ 1,322 4
Georgia...................................... DeKalb......................... 5,182 8
Georgia...................................... Dodge.......................... 821 3
Georgia...................................... Dooly.......................... 1,043 4
Georgia...................................... Dougherty...................... 1,063 4
Georgia...................................... Douglas........................ 4,642 7
Georgia...................................... Early.......................... 1,055 4
Georgia...................................... Echols......................... 1,282 4
Georgia...................................... Effingham...................... 1,392 4
Georgia...................................... Elbert......................... 1,714 5
Georgia...................................... Emanuel........................ 980 3
Georgia...................................... Evans.......................... 1,324 4
Georgia...................................... Fannin......................... 2,839 6
Georgia...................................... Fayette........................ 4,005 7
Georgia...................................... Floyd.......................... 2,120 6
Georgia...................................... Forsyth........................ 5,986 8
Georgia...................................... Franklin....................... 3,646 7
Georgia...................................... Fulton......................... 4,645 7
Georgia...................................... Gilmer......................... 3,672 7
Georgia...................................... Glascock....................... 1,250 4
Georgia...................................... Glynn.......................... 1,443 4
Georgia...................................... Gordon......................... 3,117 7
Georgia...................................... Grady.......................... 1,459 4
Georgia...................................... Greene......................... 2,326 6
Georgia...................................... Gwinnett....................... 5,179 8
Georgia...................................... Habersham...................... 4,229 7
Georgia...................................... Hall........................... 4,307 7
Georgia...................................... Hancock........................ 942 3
Georgia...................................... Haralson....................... 2,262 6
Georgia...................................... Harris......................... 1,510 5
Georgia...................................... Hart........................... 2,715 6
Georgia...................................... Heard.......................... 1,740 5
Georgia...................................... Henry.......................... 3,381 7
Georgia...................................... Houston........................ 1,758 5
Georgia...................................... Irwin.......................... 1,134 4
Georgia...................................... Jackson........................ 4,452 7
Georgia...................................... Jasper......................... 1,799 5
Georgia...................................... Jeff Davis..................... 1,207 4
Georgia...................................... Jefferson...................... 1,058 4
Georgia...................................... Jenkins........................ 1,070 4
Georgia...................................... Johnson........................ 1,270 4
Georgia...................................... Jones.......................... 1,688 5
Georgia...................................... Lamar.......................... 1,960 5
Georgia...................................... Lanier......................... 945 3
Georgia...................................... Laurens........................ 1,087 4
Georgia...................................... Lee............................ 1,235 4
Georgia...................................... Liberty........................ 1,860 5
Georgia...................................... Lincoln........................ 2,126 6
Georgia...................................... Long........................... 1,163 4
Georgia...................................... Lowndes........................ 1,637 5
Georgia...................................... Lumpkin........................ 4,877 7
Georgia...................................... Macon.......................... 1,350 4
Georgia...................................... Madison........................ 3,704 7
Georgia...................................... Marion......................... 1,231 4
Georgia...................................... McDuffie....................... 1,593 5
Georgia...................................... McIntosh....................... 1,294 4
Georgia...................................... Meriwether..................... 1,598 5
Georgia...................................... Miller......................... 1,310 4
Georgia...................................... Monroe......................... 1,735 5
Georgia...................................... Montgomery..................... 1,120 4
Georgia...................................... Morgan......................... 2,814 6
Georgia...................................... Murray......................... 2,422 6
Georgia...................................... Muscogee....................... 2,580 6
Georgia...................................... Newton......................... 3,293 7
Georgia...................................... Oconee......................... 3,876 7
Georgia...................................... Oglethorpe..................... 2,662 6
Georgia...................................... Paulding....................... 5,219 8
Georgia...................................... Peach.......................... 1,900 5
Georgia...................................... Pickens........................ 4,625 7
[[Page 65082]]
Georgia...................................... Pierce......................... 1,230 4
Georgia...................................... Pike........................... 3,001 6
Georgia...................................... Polk........................... 1,918 5
Georgia...................................... Pulaski........................ 1,121 4
Georgia...................................... Putnam......................... 2,178 6
Georgia...................................... Quitman........................ 1,090 4
Georgia...................................... Rabun.......................... 4,870 7
Georgia...................................... Randolph....................... 963 3
Georgia...................................... Richmond....................... 2,334 6
Georgia...................................... Rockdale....................... 4,574 7
Georgia...................................... Schley......................... 1,269 4
Georgia...................................... Screven........................ 1,084 4
Georgia...................................... Seminole....................... 1,238 4
Georgia...................................... Spalding....................... 3,675 7
Georgia...................................... Stephens....................... 3,558 7
Georgia...................................... Stewart........................ 1,125 4
Georgia...................................... Sumter......................... 1,137 4
Georgia...................................... Talbot......................... 1,364 4
Georgia...................................... Taliaferro..................... 1,333 4
Georgia...................................... Tattnall....................... 1,590 5
Georgia...................................... Taylor......................... 1,289 4
Georgia...................................... Telfair........................ 1,249 4
Georgia...................................... Terrell........................ 1,085 4
Georgia...................................... Thomas......................... 1,238 4
Georgia...................................... Tift........................... 1,628 5
Georgia...................................... Toombs......................... 1,222 4
Georgia...................................... Towns.......................... 3,102 7
Georgia...................................... Treutlen....................... 1,097 4
Georgia...................................... Troup.......................... 1,300 4
Georgia...................................... Turner......................... 1,295 4
Georgia...................................... Twiggs......................... 1,161 4
Georgia...................................... Union.......................... 4,348 7
Georgia...................................... Upson.......................... 1,788 5
Georgia...................................... Walker......................... 2,043 6
Georgia...................................... Walton......................... 5,206 8
Georgia...................................... Ware........................... 1,218 4
Georgia...................................... Warren......................... 1,082 4
Georgia...................................... Washington..................... 1,230 4
Georgia...................................... Wayne.......................... 1,435 4
Georgia...................................... Webster........................ 1,144 4
Georgia...................................... Wheeler........................ 971 3
Georgia...................................... White.......................... 4,816 7
Georgia...................................... Whitfield...................... 1,968 5
Georgia...................................... Wilcox......................... 1,050 4
Georgia...................................... Wilkes......................... 1,394 4
Georgia...................................... Wilkinson...................... 1,106 4
Georgia...................................... Worth.......................... 1,246 4
Hawaii....................................... Hawaii......................... 2,258 6
Hawaii....................................... Honolulu....................... 6,686 8
Hawaii....................................... Kauai.......................... 3,191 7
Hawaii....................................... Maui........................... 3,290 7
Idaho........................................ Ada............................ 2,777 6
Idaho........................................ Adams.......................... 454 2
Idaho........................................ Bannock........................ 585 3
Idaho........................................ Bear Lake...................... 632 3
Idaho........................................ Benewah........................ 970 3
Idaho........................................ Bingham........................ 921 3
Idaho........................................ Blaine......................... 1,043 4
Idaho........................................ Boise.......................... 808 3
Idaho........................................ Bonner......................... 2,327 6
Idaho........................................ Bonneville..................... 1,042 4
Idaho........................................ Boundary....................... 1,913 5
Idaho........................................ Butte.......................... 703 3
Idaho........................................ Camas.......................... 558 3
Idaho........................................ Canyon......................... 3,375 7
Idaho........................................ Caribou........................ 541 3
Idaho........................................ Cassia......................... 789 3
Idaho........................................ Clark.......................... 518 3
Idaho........................................ Clearwater..................... 1,028 4
Idaho........................................ Custer......................... 1,469 4
Idaho........................................ Elmore......................... 575 3
[[Page 65083]]
Idaho........................................ Franklin....................... 862 3
Idaho........................................ Fremont........................ 918 3
Idaho........................................ Gem............................ 987 3
Idaho........................................ Gooding........................ 2,028 6
Idaho........................................ Idaho.......................... 596 3
Idaho........................................ Jefferson...................... 1,406 4
Idaho........................................ Jerome......................... 1,510 5
Idaho........................................ Kootenai....................... 1,812 5
Idaho........................................ Latah.......................... 1,120 4
Idaho........................................ Lemhi.......................... 982 3
Idaho........................................ Lewis.......................... 664 3
Idaho........................................ Lincoln........................ 754 3
Idaho........................................ Madison........................ 1,826 5
Idaho........................................ Minidoka....................... 1,600 5
Idaho........................................ Nez Perce...................... 682 3
Idaho........................................ Oneida......................... 534 3
Idaho........................................ Owyhee......................... 551 3
Idaho........................................ Payette........................ 1,388 4
Idaho........................................ Power.......................... 789 3
Idaho........................................ Shoshone....................... 2,754 6
Idaho........................................ Teton.......................... 1,970 5
Idaho........................................ Twin Falls..................... 1,557 5
Idaho........................................ Valley......................... 1,219 4
Idaho........................................ Washington..................... 589 3
Illinois..................................... Adams.......................... 1,624 5
Illinois..................................... Alexander...................... 1,044 4
Illinois..................................... Bond........................... 1,682 5
Illinois..................................... Boone.......................... 2,739 6
Illinois..................................... Brown.......................... 1,330 4
Illinois..................................... Bureau......................... 2,124 6
Illinois..................................... Calhoun........................ 1,246 4
Illinois..................................... Carroll........................ 1,902 5
Illinois..................................... Cass........................... 1,682 5
Illinois..................................... Champaign...................... 2,312 6
Illinois..................................... Christian...................... 2,024 6
Illinois..................................... Clark.......................... 1,560 5
Illinois..................................... Clay........................... 1,268 4
Illinois..................................... Clinton........................ 1,973 5
Illinois..................................... Coles.......................... 2,173 6
Illinois..................................... Cook........................... 5,029 8
Illinois..................................... Crawford....................... 1,370 4
Illinois..................................... Cumberland..................... 1,698 5
Illinois..................................... De Witt........................ 2,410 6
Illinois..................................... DeKalb......................... 3,007 7
Illinois..................................... Douglas........................ 2,376 6
Illinois..................................... DuPage......................... 4,045 7
Illinois..................................... Edgar.......................... 1,873 5
Illinois..................................... Edwards........................ 1,273 4
Illinois..................................... Effingham...................... 1,736 5
Illinois..................................... Fayette........................ 1,371 4
Illinois..................................... Ford........................... 2,086 6
Illinois..................................... Franklin....................... 1,258 4
Illinois..................................... Fulton......................... 1,509 5
Illinois..................................... Gallatin....................... 1,198 4
Illinois..................................... Greene......................... 1,484 4
Illinois..................................... Grundy......................... 2,477 6
Illinois..................................... Hamilton....................... 1,298 4
Illinois..................................... Hancock........................ 2,035 6
Illinois..................................... Hardin......................... 1,389 4
Illinois..................................... Henderson...................... 1,802 5
Illinois..................................... Henry.......................... 1,966 5
Illinois..................................... Iroquois....................... 1,922 5
Illinois..................................... Jackson........................ 1,338 4
Illinois..................................... Jasper......................... 1,606 5
Illinois..................................... Jefferson...................... 1,066 4
Illinois..................................... Jersey......................... 1,722 5
Illinois..................................... Jo Daviess..................... 1,752 5
Illinois..................................... Johnson........................ 1,090 4
Illinois..................................... Kane........................... 3,086 7
Illinois..................................... Kankakee....................... 2,250 6
Illinois..................................... Kendall........................ 3,365 7
[[Page 65084]]
Illinois..................................... Knox........................... 1,904 5
Illinois..................................... La Salle....................... 2,485 6
Illinois..................................... Lake........................... 3,724 7
Illinois..................................... Lawrence....................... 1,413 4
Illinois..................................... Lee............................ 2,398 6
Illinois..................................... Livingston..................... 2,126 6
Illinois..................................... Logan.......................... 2,246 6
Illinois..................................... Macon.......................... 2,446 6
Illinois..................................... Macoupin....................... 1,890 5
Illinois..................................... Madison........................ 1,982 5
Illinois..................................... Marion......................... 1,286 4
Illinois..................................... Marshall....................... 2,163 6
Illinois..................................... Mason.......................... 1,746 5
Illinois..................................... Massac......................... 1,001 3
Illinois..................................... McDonough...................... 1,798 5
Illinois..................................... McHenry........................ 3,410 7
Illinois..................................... McLean......................... 2,330 6
Illinois..................................... Menard......................... 1,937 5
Illinois..................................... Mercer......................... 1,773 5
Illinois..................................... Monroe......................... 2,034 6
Illinois..................................... Montgomery..................... 1,626 5
Illinois..................................... Morgan......................... 1,920 5
Illinois..................................... Moultrie....................... 2,362 6
Illinois..................................... Ogle........................... 2,505 6
Illinois..................................... Peoria......................... 2,203 6
Illinois..................................... Perry.......................... 1,138 4
Illinois..................................... Piatt.......................... 2,385 6
Illinois..................................... Pike........................... 1,472 4
Illinois..................................... Pope........................... 924 3
Illinois..................................... Pulaski........................ 1,134 4
Illinois..................................... Putnam......................... 2,310 6
Illinois..................................... Randolph....................... 1,551 5
Illinois..................................... Richland....................... 1,435 4
Illinois..................................... Rock Island.................... 2,114 6
Illinois..................................... Saline......................... 1,230 4
Illinois..................................... Sangamon....................... 2,263 6
Illinois..................................... Schuyler....................... 1,279 4
Illinois..................................... Scott.......................... 1,642 5
Illinois..................................... Shelby......................... 1,873 5
Illinois..................................... St. Clair...................... 2,207 6
Illinois..................................... Stark.......................... 2,105 6
Illinois..................................... Stephenson..................... 1,910 5
Illinois..................................... Tazewell....................... 2,290 6
Illinois..................................... Union.......................... 1,555 5
Illinois..................................... Vermilion...................... 1,974 5
Illinois..................................... Wabash......................... 1,378 4
Illinois..................................... Warren......................... 2,014 6
Illinois..................................... Washington..................... 1,520 5
Illinois..................................... Wayne.......................... 991 3
Illinois..................................... White.......................... 1,287 4
Illinois..................................... Whiteside...................... 2,032 6
Illinois..................................... Will........................... 3,722 7
Illinois..................................... Williamson..................... 1,609 5
Illinois..................................... Winnebago...................... 2,365 6
Illinois..................................... Woodford....................... 2,394 6
Indiana...................................... Adams.......................... 2,304 6
Indiana...................................... Allen.......................... 2,679 6
Indiana...................................... Bartholomew.................... 2,366 6
Indiana...................................... Benton......................... 1,995 5
Indiana...................................... Blackford...................... 1,760 5
Indiana...................................... Boone.......................... 2,555 6
Indiana...................................... Brown.......................... 2,213 6
Indiana...................................... Carroll........................ 2,186 6
Indiana...................................... Cass........................... 1,911 5
Indiana...................................... Clark.......................... 2,621 6
Indiana...................................... Clay........................... 1,621 5
Indiana...................................... Clinton........................ 2,182 6
Indiana...................................... Crawford....................... 1,460 4
Indiana...................................... Daviess........................ 1,620 5
Indiana...................................... Dearborn....................... 2,594 6
Indiana...................................... Decatur........................ 2,113 6
[[Page 65085]]
Indiana...................................... DeKalb......................... 1,762 5
Indiana...................................... Delaware....................... 2,032 6
Indiana...................................... Dubois......................... 1,853 5
Indiana...................................... Elkhart........................ 3,042 7
Indiana...................................... Fayette........................ 1,834 5
Indiana...................................... Floyd.......................... 2,933 6
Indiana...................................... Fountain....................... 1,774 5
Indiana...................................... Franklin....................... 1,993 5
Indiana...................................... Fulton......................... 1,636 5
Indiana...................................... Gibson......................... 1,824 5
Indiana...................................... Grant.......................... 2,026 6
Indiana...................................... Greene......................... 1,600 5
Indiana...................................... Hamilton....................... 3,250 7
Indiana...................................... Hancock........................ 2,576 6
Indiana...................................... Harrison....................... 2,054 6
Indiana...................................... Hendricks...................... 2,722 6
Indiana...................................... Henry.......................... 2,190 6
Indiana...................................... Howard......................... 2,451 6
Indiana...................................... Huntington..................... 1,994 5
Indiana...................................... Jackson........................ 1,954 5
Indiana...................................... Jasper......................... 1,949 5
Indiana...................................... Jay............................ 2,042 6
Indiana...................................... Jefferson...................... 1,918 5
Indiana...................................... Jennings....................... 1,743 5
Indiana...................................... Johnson........................ 3,021 7
Indiana...................................... Knox........................... 1,725 5
Indiana...................................... Kosciusko...................... 2,176 6
Indiana...................................... LaGrange....................... 2,835 6
Indiana...................................... Lake........................... 2,714 6
Indiana...................................... LaPorte........................ 2,122 6
Indiana...................................... Lawrence....................... 1,260 4
Indiana...................................... Madison........................ 2,253 6
Indiana...................................... Marion......................... 3,530 7
Indiana...................................... Marshall....................... 1,886 5
Indiana...................................... Martin......................... 1,550 5
Indiana...................................... Miami.......................... 1,925 5
Indiana...................................... Monroe......................... 1,955 5
Indiana...................................... Montgomery..................... 1,939 5
Indiana...................................... Morgan......................... 2,529 6
Indiana...................................... Newton......................... 1,914 5
Indiana...................................... Noble.......................... 2,194 6
Indiana...................................... Ohio........................... 2,610 6
Indiana...................................... Orange......................... 1,521 5
Indiana...................................... Owen........................... 1,625 5
Indiana...................................... Parke.......................... 1,641 5
Indiana...................................... Perry.......................... 1,447 4
Indiana...................................... Pike........................... 1,641 5
Indiana...................................... Porter......................... 2,520 6
Indiana...................................... Posey.......................... 1,790 5
Indiana...................................... Pulaski........................ 1,857 5
Indiana...................................... Putnam......................... 1,941 5
Indiana...................................... Randolph....................... 1,698 5
Indiana...................................... Ripley......................... 2,014 6
Indiana...................................... Rush........................... 2,099 6
Indiana...................................... Scott.......................... 1,778 5
Indiana...................................... Shelby......................... 2,241 6
Indiana...................................... Spencer........................ 1,553 5
Indiana...................................... St. Joseph..................... 2,331 6
Indiana...................................... Starke......................... 1,636 5
Indiana...................................... Steuben........................ 1,834 5
Indiana...................................... Sullivan....................... 1,580 5
Indiana...................................... Switzerland.................... 1,951 5
Indiana...................................... Tippecanoe..................... 2,291 6
Indiana...................................... Tipton......................... 2,612 6
Indiana...................................... Union.......................... 1,980 5
Indiana...................................... Vanderburgh.................... 2,050 6
Indiana...................................... Vermillion..................... 1,833 5
Indiana...................................... Vigo........................... 1,732 5
Indiana...................................... Wabash......................... 2,032 6
Indiana...................................... Warren......................... 1,956 5
Indiana...................................... Warrick........................ 1,919 5
[[Page 65086]]
Indiana...................................... Washington..................... 1,790 5
Indiana...................................... Wayne.......................... 1,779 5
Indiana...................................... Wells.......................... 1,885 5
Indiana...................................... White.......................... 2,028 6
Indiana...................................... Whitley........................ 2,012 6
Iowa......................................... Adair.......................... 1,171 4
Iowa......................................... Adams.......................... 1,137 4
Iowa......................................... Allamakee...................... 1,219 4
Iowa......................................... Appanoose...................... 741 3
Iowa......................................... Audubon........................ 1,472 4
Iowa......................................... Benton......................... 1,899 5
Iowa......................................... Black Hawk..................... 2,229 6
Iowa......................................... Boone.......................... 1,721 5
Iowa......................................... Bremer......................... 2,070 6
Iowa......................................... Buchanan....................... 1,959 5
Iowa......................................... Buena Vista.................... 1,972 5
Iowa......................................... Butler......................... 1,786 5
Iowa......................................... Calhoun........................ 1,968 5
Iowa......................................... Carroll........................ 1,768 5
Iowa......................................... Cass........................... 1,311 4
Iowa......................................... Cedar.......................... 1,665 5
Iowa......................................... Cerro Gordo.................... 1,691 5
Iowa......................................... Cherokee....................... 1,819 5
Iowa......................................... Chickasaw...................... 1,735 5
Iowa......................................... Clarke......................... 796 3
Iowa......................................... Clay........................... 1,802 5
Iowa......................................... Clayton........................ 1,522 5
Iowa......................................... Clinton........................ 1,847 5
Iowa......................................... Crawford....................... 1,522 5
Iowa......................................... Dallas......................... 2,030 6
Iowa......................................... Davis.......................... 909 3
Iowa......................................... Decatur........................ 756 3
Iowa......................................... Delaware....................... 1,900 5
Iowa......................................... Des Moines..................... 1,773 5
Iowa......................................... Dickinson...................... 1,549 5
Iowa......................................... Dubuque........................ 1,707 5
Iowa......................................... Emmet.......................... 1,525 5
Iowa......................................... Fayette........................ 1,728 5
Iowa......................................... Floyd.......................... 1,822 5
Iowa......................................... Franklin....................... 1,723 5
Iowa......................................... Fremont........................ 1,288 4
Iowa......................................... Greene......................... 1,674 5
Iowa......................................... Grundy......................... 2,061 6
Iowa......................................... Guthrie........................ 1,450 4
Iowa......................................... Hamilton....................... 1,859 5
Iowa......................................... Hancock........................ 1,676 5
Iowa......................................... Hardin......................... 1,970 5
Iowa......................................... Harrison....................... 1,354 4
Iowa......................................... Henry.......................... 1,615 5
Iowa......................................... Howard......................... 1,594 5
Iowa......................................... Humboldt....................... 1,990 5
Iowa......................................... Ida............................ 1,647 5
Iowa......................................... Iowa........................... 1,365 4
Iowa......................................... Jackson........................ 1,479 4
Iowa......................................... Jasper......................... 1,632 5
Iowa......................................... Jefferson...................... 1,194 4
Iowa......................................... Johnson........................ 1,902 5
Iowa......................................... Jones.......................... 1,762 5
Iowa......................................... Keokuk......................... 1,215 4
Iowa......................................... Kossuth........................ 1,870 5
Iowa......................................... Lee............................ 1,422 4
Iowa......................................... Linn........................... 2,062 6
Iowa......................................... Louisa......................... 1,720 5
Iowa......................................... Lucas.......................... 874 3
Iowa......................................... Lyon........................... 1,885 5
Iowa......................................... Madison........................ 1,406 4
Iowa......................................... Mahaska........................ 1,482 4
Iowa......................................... Marion......................... 1,193 4
Iowa......................................... Marshall....................... 1,607 5
Iowa......................................... Mills.......................... 1,442 4
Iowa......................................... Mitchell....................... 1,778 5
[[Page 65087]]
Iowa......................................... Monona......................... 1,434 4
Iowa......................................... Monroe......................... 806 3
Iowa......................................... Montgomery..................... 1,136 4
Iowa......................................... Muscatine...................... 1,826 5
Iowa......................................... O'Brien........................ 2,036 6
Iowa......................................... Osceola........................ 1,980 5
Iowa......................................... Page........................... 1,005 4
Iowa......................................... Palo Alto...................... 1,885 5
Iowa......................................... Plymouth....................... 1,814 5
Iowa......................................... Pocahontas..................... 1,902 5
Iowa......................................... Polk........................... 1,725 5
Iowa......................................... Pottawattamie.................. 1,622 5
Iowa......................................... Poweshiek...................... 1,466 4
Iowa......................................... Ringgold....................... 812 3
Iowa......................................... Sac............................ 1,950 5
Iowa......................................... Scott.......................... 2,402 6
Iowa......................................... Shelby......................... 1,635 5
Iowa......................................... Sioux.......................... 2,124 6
Iowa......................................... Story.......................... 1,874 5
Iowa......................................... Tama........................... 1,802 5
Iowa......................................... Taylor......................... 981 3
Iowa......................................... Union.......................... 1,047 4
Iowa......................................... Van Buren...................... 976 3
Iowa......................................... Wapello........................ 1,232 4
Iowa......................................... Warren......................... 1,174 4
Iowa......................................... Washington..................... 1,817 5
Iowa......................................... Wayne.......................... 801 3
Iowa......................................... Webster........................ 1,765 5
Iowa......................................... Winnebago...................... 1,681 5
Iowa......................................... Winneshiek..................... 1,446 4
Iowa......................................... Woodbury....................... 1,435 4
Iowa......................................... Worth.......................... 1,722 5
Iowa......................................... Wright......................... 1,983 5
Kansas....................................... Allen.......................... 657 3
Kansas....................................... Anderson....................... 719 3
Kansas....................................... Atchison....................... 846 3
Kansas....................................... Barber......................... 353 2
Kansas....................................... Barton......................... 473 2
Kansas....................................... Bourbon........................ 576 3
Kansas....................................... Brown.......................... 931 3
Kansas....................................... Butler......................... 802 3
Kansas....................................... Chase.......................... 494 2
Kansas....................................... Chautauqua..................... 428 2
Kansas....................................... Cherokee....................... 774 3
Kansas....................................... Cheyenne....................... 384 2
Kansas....................................... Clark.......................... 316 2
Kansas....................................... Clay........................... 726 3
Kansas....................................... Cloud.......................... 483 2
Kansas....................................... Coffey......................... 604 3
Kansas....................................... Comanche....................... 326 2
Kansas....................................... Cowley......................... 620 3
Kansas....................................... Crawford....................... 700 3
Kansas....................................... Decatur........................ 388 2
Kansas....................................... Dickinson...................... 533 3
Kansas....................................... Doniphan....................... 1,025 4
Kansas....................................... Douglas........................ 1,608 5
Kansas....................................... Edwards........................ 463 2
Kansas....................................... Elk............................ 397 2
Kansas....................................... Ellis.......................... 422 2
Kansas....................................... Ellsworth...................... 414 2
Kansas....................................... Finney......................... 493 2
Kansas....................................... Ford........................... 462 2
Kansas....................................... Franklin....................... 992 3
Kansas....................................... Geary.......................... 687 3
Kansas....................................... Gove........................... 359 2
Kansas....................................... Graham......................... 362 2
Kansas....................................... Grant.......................... 531 3
Kansas....................................... Gray........................... 633 3
Kansas....................................... Greeley........................ 403 2
Kansas....................................... Greenwood...................... 442 2
Kansas....................................... Hamilton....................... 372 2
[[Page 65088]]
Kansas....................................... Harper......................... 498 2
Kansas....................................... Harvey......................... 742 3
Kansas....................................... Haskell........................ 595 3
Kansas....................................... Hodgeman....................... 410 2
Kansas....................................... Jackson........................ 666 3
Kansas....................................... Jefferson...................... 854 3
Kansas....................................... Jewell......................... 525 3
Kansas....................................... Johnson........................ 1,582 5
Kansas....................................... Kearny......................... 383 2
Kansas....................................... Kingman........................ 546 3
Kansas....................................... Kiowe.......................... 353 2
Kansas....................................... Labette........................ 597 3
Kansas....................................... Lane........................... 374 2
Kansas....................................... Leavenworth.................... 1,271 4
Kansas....................................... Lincoln........................ 351 2
Kansas....................................... Linn........................... 802 3
Kansas....................................... Logan.......................... 334 2
Kansas....................................... Lyon........................... 622 3
Kansas....................................... Marion......................... 585 3
Kansas....................................... Marshall....................... 734 3
Kansas....................................... McPherson...................... 921 3
Kansas....................................... Meade.......................... 467 2
Kansas....................................... Miami.......................... 1,404 4
Kansas....................................... Mitchell....................... 579 3
Kansas....................................... Montgomery..................... 707 3
Kansas....................................... Morris......................... 506 3
Kansas....................................... Morton......................... 373 2
Kansas....................................... Nemaha......................... 798 3
Kansas....................................... Neosho......................... 610 3
Kansas....................................... Ness........................... 330 2
Kansas....................................... Norton......................... 358 2
Kansas....................................... Osage.......................... 719 3
Kansas....................................... Osborne........................ 398 2
Kansas....................................... Ottawa......................... 462 2
Kansas....................................... Pawnee......................... 450 2
Kansas....................................... Phillips....................... 369 2
Kansas....................................... Pottawatomie................... 578 3
Kansas....................................... Pratt.......................... 506 3
Kansas....................................... Rawlins........................ 333 2
Kansas....................................... Reno........................... 700 3
Kansas....................................... Republic....................... 655 3
Kansas....................................... Rice........................... 534 3
Kansas....................................... Riley.......................... 828 3
Kansas....................................... Rooks.......................... 358 2
Kansas....................................... Rush........................... 378 2
Kansas....................................... Russell........................ 344 2
Kansas....................................... Saline......................... 598 3
Kansas....................................... Scott.......................... 444 2
Kansas....................................... Sedgwick....................... 958 3
Kansas....................................... Seward......................... 518 3
Kansas....................................... Shawnee........................ 1,012 4
Kansas....................................... Sheridan....................... 477 2
Kansas....................................... Sherman........................ 498 2
Kansas....................................... Smith.......................... 530 3
Kansas....................................... Stafford....................... 611 3
Kansas....................................... Stanton........................ 458 2
Kansas....................................... Stevens........................ 542 3
Kansas....................................... Sumner......................... 546 3
Kansas....................................... Thomas......................... 486 2
Kansas....................................... Trego.......................... 370 2
Kansas....................................... Wabaunsee...................... 581 3
Kansas....................................... Wallace........................ 355 2
Kansas....................................... Washington..................... 643 3
Kansas....................................... Wichita........................ 402 2
Kansas....................................... Wilson......................... 616 3
Kansas....................................... Woodson........................ 471 2
Kansas....................................... Wyandotte...................... 3,132 7
Kentucky..................................... Adair.......................... 1,427 4
Kentucky..................................... Allen.......................... 1,431 4
Kentucky..................................... Anderson....................... 1,926 5
Kentucky..................................... Ballard........................ 1,356 4
[[Page 65089]]
Kentucky..................................... Barren......................... 1,287 4
Kentucky..................................... Bath........................... 1,098 4
Kentucky..................................... Bell........................... 1,061 4
Kentucky..................................... Boone.......................... 2,906 6
Kentucky..................................... Bourbon........................ 2,131 6
Kentucky..................................... Boyd........................... 1,157 4
Kentucky..................................... Boyle.......................... 1,709 5
Kentucky..................................... Bracken........................ 1,227 4
Kentucky..................................... Breathitt...................... 738 3
Kentucky..................................... Breckinridge................... 1,206 4
Kentucky..................................... Bullitt........................ 2,194 6
Kentucky..................................... Butler......................... 1,230 4
Kentucky..................................... Caldwell....................... 925 3
Kentucky..................................... Calloway....................... 1,490 4
Kentucky..................................... Campbell....................... 3,069 7
Kentucky..................................... Carlisle....................... 1,128 4
Kentucky..................................... Carroll........................ 1,657 5
Kentucky..................................... Carter......................... 1,197 4
Kentucky..................................... Casey.......................... 934 3
Kentucky..................................... Christian...................... 1,357 4
Kentucky..................................... Clark.......................... 1,746 5
Kentucky..................................... Clay........................... 767 3
Kentucky..................................... Clinton........................ 1,223 4
Kentucky..................................... Crittenden..................... 834 3
Kentucky..................................... Cumberland..................... 830 3
Kentucky..................................... Daviess........................ 1,633 5
Kentucky..................................... Edmonson....................... 941 3
Kentucky..................................... Elliott........................ 725 3
Kentucky..................................... Estill......................... 890 3
Kentucky..................................... Fayette........................ 3,671 7
Kentucky..................................... Fleming........................ 1,018 4
Kentucky..................................... Floyd.......................... 1,229 4
Kentucky..................................... Franklin....................... 1,880 5
Kentucky..................................... Fulton......................... 1,160 4
Kentucky..................................... Gallatin....................... 1,724 5
Kentucky..................................... Garrard........................ 1,482 4
Kentucky..................................... Grant.......................... 2,036 6
Kentucky..................................... Graves......................... 1,327 4
Kentucky..................................... Grayson........................ 1,102 4
Kentucky..................................... Green.......................... 1,218 4
Kentucky..................................... Greenup........................ 963 3
Kentucky..................................... Hancock........................ 1,066 4
Kentucky..................................... Hardin......................... 1,516 5
Kentucky..................................... Harlan......................... 1,799 5
Kentucky..................................... Harrison....................... 1,494 4
Kentucky..................................... Hart........................... 1,110 4
Kentucky..................................... Henderson...................... 1,546 5
Kentucky..................................... Henry.......................... 1,918 5
Kentucky..................................... Hickman........................ 1,198 4
Kentucky..................................... Hopkins........................ 1,041 4
Kentucky..................................... Jackson........................ 955 3
Kentucky..................................... Jefferson...................... 3,934 7
Kentucky..................................... Jessamine...................... 2,959 6
Kentucky..................................... Johnson........................ 1,218 4
Kentucky..................................... Kenton......................... 3,020 7
Kentucky..................................... Knott.......................... 1,279 4
Kentucky..................................... Knox........................... 1,236 4
Kentucky..................................... Larue.......................... 1,549 5
Kentucky..................................... Laurel......................... 1,844 5
Kentucky..................................... Lawrence....................... 728 3
Kentucky..................................... Lee............................ 911 3
Kentucky..................................... Leslie......................... 629 3
Kentucky..................................... Letcher........................ 830 3
Kentucky..................................... Lewis.......................... 715 3
Kentucky..................................... Lincoln........................ 1,396 4
Kentucky..................................... Livingston..................... 819 3
Kentucky..................................... Logan.......................... 1,274 4
Kentucky..................................... Lyon........................... 950 3
Kentucky..................................... Madison........................ 1,813 5
Kentucky..................................... Magoffin....................... 896 3
Kentucky..................................... Marion......................... 1,417 4
[[Page 65090]]
Kentucky..................................... Marshall....................... 1,406 4
Kentucky..................................... Martin......................... 488 2
Kentucky..................................... Mason.......................... 1,511 5
Kentucky..................................... McCracken...................... 1,402 4
Kentucky..................................... McCreary....................... 1,797 5
Kentucky..................................... McLean......................... 1,357 4
Kentucky..................................... Meade.......................... 1,654 5
Kentucky..................................... Menifee........................ 1,554 5
Kentucky..................................... Mercer......................... 2,282 6
Kentucky..................................... Metcalfe....................... 1,275 4
Kentucky..................................... Monroe......................... 1,050 4
Kentucky..................................... Montgomery..................... 1,530 5
Kentucky..................................... Morgan......................... 775 3
Kentucky..................................... Muhlenberg..................... 1,009 4
Kentucky..................................... Nelson......................... 1,723 5
Kentucky..................................... Nicholas....................... 1,008 4
Kentucky..................................... Ohio........................... 1,373 4
Kentucky..................................... Oldham......................... 3,650 7
Kentucky..................................... Owen........................... 1,331 4
Kentucky..................................... Owsley......................... 1,055 4
Kentucky..................................... Pendleton...................... 1,183 4
Kentucky..................................... Perry.......................... 910 3
Kentucky..................................... Pike........................... 891 3
Kentucky..................................... Powell......................... 1,450 4
Kentucky..................................... Pulaski........................ 1,497 4
Kentucky..................................... Robertson...................... 858 3
Kentucky..................................... Rockcastle..................... 1,390 4
Kentucky..................................... Rowan.......................... 1,064 4
Kentucky..................................... Russell........................ 1,562 5
Kentucky..................................... Scott.......................... 2,517 6
Kentucky..................................... Shelby......................... 2,577 6
Kentucky..................................... Simpson........................ 1,617 5
Kentucky..................................... Spencer........................ 2,032 6
Kentucky..................................... Taylor......................... 1,351 4
Kentucky..................................... Todd........................... 1,387 4
Kentucky..................................... Trigg.......................... 1,181 4
Kentucky..................................... Trimble........................ 1,208 4
Kentucky..................................... Union.......................... 1,384 4
Kentucky..................................... Warren......................... 1,643 5
Kentucky..................................... Washington..................... 1,421 4
Kentucky..................................... Wayne.......................... 1,773 5
Kentucky..................................... Webster........................ 1,128 4
Kentucky..................................... Whitley........................ 1,224 4
Kentucky..................................... Wolfe.......................... 889 3
Kentucky..................................... Woodford....................... 3,004 7
Louisiana.................................... Acadia......................... 1,418 4
Louisiana.................................... Allen.......................... 983 3
Louisiana.................................... Ascension...................... 2,223 6
Louisiana.................................... Assumption..................... 1,278 4
Louisiana.................................... Avoyelles...................... 1,040 4
Louisiana.................................... Beauregard..................... 1,071 4
Louisiana.................................... Bienville...................... 1,223 4
Louisiana.................................... Bossier........................ 1,334 4
Louisiana.................................... Caddo.......................... 1,142 4
Louisiana.................................... Calcasieu...................... 1,140 4
Louisiana.................................... Caldwell....................... 1,080 4
Louisiana.................................... Cameron........................ 1,150 4
Louisiana.................................... Catahoula...................... 931 3
Louisiana.................................... Claiborne...................... 1,269 4
Louisiana.................................... Concordia...................... 902 3
Louisiana.................................... De Soto........................ 1,022 4
Louisiana.................................... East Baton Rouge............... 2,459 6
Louisiana.................................... East Carroll................... 955 3
Louisiana.................................... East Feliciana................. 1,542 5
Louisiana.................................... Evangeline..................... 1,009 4
Louisiana.................................... Franklin....................... 953 3
Louisiana.................................... Grant.......................... 1,066 4
Louisiana.................................... Iberia......................... 1,506 5
Louisiana.................................... Iberville...................... 1,482 4
Louisiana.................................... Jackson........................ 2,102 6
Louisiana.................................... Jefferson...................... 1,763 5
[[Page 65091]]
Louisiana.................................... Jefferson Davis................ 871 3
Louisiana.................................... La Salle....................... 1,350 4
Louisiana.................................... Lafayette...................... 2,529 6
Louisiana.................................... Lafourche...................... 1,176 4
Louisiana.................................... Lincoln........................ 1,562 5
Louisiana.................................... Livingston..................... 2,333 6
Louisiana.................................... Madison........................ 884 3
Louisiana.................................... Morehouse...................... 938 3
Louisiana.................................... Natchitoches................... 1,090 4
Louisiana.................................... Orleans........................ 35,002 11
Louisiana.................................... Ouachita....................... 1,394 4
Louisiana.................................... Plaquemines.................... 2,311 6
Louisiana.................................... Pointe Coupee.................. 1,138 4
Louisiana.................................... Rapides........................ 1,363 4
Louisiana.................................... Red River...................... 716 3
Louisiana.................................... Richland....................... 836 3
Louisiana.................................... Sabine......................... 1,515 5
Louisiana.................................... St. Bernard.................... 3,397 7
Louisiana.................................... St. Charles.................... 3,322 7
Louisiana.................................... St. Helena..................... 1,586 5
Louisiana.................................... St. James...................... 1,040 4
Louisiana.................................... St. John the Baptist........... 2,728 6
Louisiana.................................... St. Landry..................... 1,107 4
Louisiana.................................... St. Martin..................... 1,333 4
Louisiana.................................... St. Mary....................... 1,182 4
Louisiana.................................... St. Tammany.................... 3,126 7
Louisiana.................................... Tangipahoa..................... 2,224 6
Louisiana.................................... Tensas......................... 844 3
Louisiana.................................... Terrebonne..................... 1,458 4
Louisiana.................................... Union.......................... 1,579 5
Louisiana.................................... Vermilion...................... 1,306 4
Louisiana.................................... Vernon......................... 1,450 4
Louisiana.................................... Washington..................... 1,761 5
Louisiana.................................... Webster........................ 2,310 6
Louisiana.................................... West Baton Rouge............... 1,572 5
Louisiana.................................... West Carroll................... 1,425 4
Louisiana.................................... West Feliciana................. 1,454 4
Louisiana.................................... Winn........................... 1,267 4
Maine........................................ Androscoggin................... 1,937 5
Maine........................................ Aroostook...................... 718 3
Maine........................................ Cumberland..................... 3,234 7
Maine........................................ Franklin....................... 1,167 4
Maine........................................ Hancock........................ 1,568 5
Maine........................................ Kennebec....................... 1,539 5
Maine........................................ Knox........................... 2,266 6
Maine........................................ Lincoln........................ 2,195 6
Maine........................................ Oxford......................... 1,918 5
Maine........................................ Penobscot...................... 1,013 4
Maine........................................ Piscataquis.................... 812 3
Maine........................................ Sagadahoc...................... 2,298 6
Maine........................................ Somerset....................... 1,044 4
Maine........................................ Waldo.......................... 1,334 4
Maine........................................ Washington..................... 685 3
Maine........................................ York........................... 3,009 7
Maryland..................................... Allegany....................... 1,958 5
Maryland..................................... Anne Arundel................... 5,980 8
Maryland..................................... Baltimore...................... 5,459 8
Maryland..................................... Calvert........................ 3,184 7
Maryland..................................... Caroline....................... 2,361 6
Maryland..................................... Carroll........................ 4,503 7
Maryland..................................... Cecil.......................... 4,639 7
Maryland..................................... Charles........................ 2,674 6
Maryland..................................... Dorchester..................... 2,163 6
Maryland..................................... Frederick...................... 4,260 7
Maryland..................................... Garrett........................ 1,743 5
Maryland..................................... Harford........................ 3,922 7
Maryland..................................... Howard......................... 4,857 7
Maryland..................................... Kent........................... 2,704 6
Maryland..................................... Montgomery..................... 4,783 7
Maryland..................................... Prince George's................ 5,225 8
Maryland..................................... Queen Anne's................... 2,515 6
[[Page 65092]]
Maryland..................................... Somerset....................... 2,013 6
Maryland..................................... St. Mary's..................... 2,265 6
Maryland..................................... Talbot......................... 3,362 7
Maryland..................................... Washington..................... 3,043 7
Maryland..................................... Wicomico....................... 2,730 6
Maryland..................................... Worcester...................... 1,915 5
Massachusetts................................ Barnstable..................... 17,137 9
Massachusetts................................ Berkshire...................... 4,511 7
Massachusetts................................ Bristol........................ 10,200 9
Massachusetts................................ Dukes.......................... 9,074 8
Massachusetts................................ Essex.......................... 11,648 9
Massachusetts................................ Franklin....................... 3,191 7
Massachusetts................................ Hampden........................ 5,123 8
Massachusetts................................ Hampshire...................... 5,281 8
Massachusetts................................ Middlesex...................... 16,780 9
Massachusetts................................ Nantucket...................... 40,659 11
Massachusetts................................ Norfolk........................ 12,768 9
Massachusetts................................ Plymouth....................... 10,108 9
Massachusetts................................ Suffolk........................ 44,817 11
Massachusetts................................ Worcester...................... 5,902 8
Michigan..................................... Alcona......................... 1,726 5
Michigan..................................... Alger.......................... 1,245 4
Michigan..................................... Allegan........................ 2,527 6
Michigan..................................... Alpena......................... 1,551 5
Michigan..................................... Antrim......................... 2,071 6
Michigan..................................... Arenac......................... 1,626 5
Michigan..................................... Baraga......................... 993 3
Michigan..................................... Barry.......................... 2,046 6
Michigan..................................... Bay............................ 2,058 6
Michigan..................................... Benzie......................... 2,460 6
Michigan..................................... Berrien........................ 3,118 7
Michigan..................................... Branch......................... 1,962 5
Michigan..................................... Calhoun........................ 1,851 5
Michigan..................................... Cass........................... 1,824 5
Michigan..................................... Charlevoix..................... 2,542 6
Michigan..................................... Cheboygan...................... 1,663 5
Michigan..................................... Chippewa....................... 1,043 4
Michigan..................................... Clare.......................... 1,641 5
Michigan..................................... Clinton........................ 1,897 5
Michigan..................................... Crawford....................... 2,030 6
Michigan..................................... Delta.......................... 1,156 4
Michigan..................................... Dickinson...................... 1,126 4
Michigan..................................... Eaton.......................... 2,270 6
Michigan..................................... Emmet.......................... 2,386 6
Michigan..................................... Genesee........................ 3,082 7
Michigan..................................... Gladwin........................ 1,742 5
Michigan..................................... Gogebic........................ 1,457 4
Michigan..................................... Grand Traverse................. 3,311 7
Michigan..................................... Gratiot........................ 1,616 5
Michigan..................................... Hillsdale...................... 1,920 5
Michigan..................................... Houghton....................... 1,061 4
Michigan..................................... Huron.......................... 1,598 5
Michigan..................................... Ingham......................... 2,303 6
Michigan..................................... Ionia.......................... 2,229 6
Michigan..................................... Iosco.......................... 1,824 5
Michigan..................................... Iron........................... 1,195 4
Michigan..................................... Isabella....................... 1,603 5
Michigan..................................... Jackson........................ 2,322 6
Michigan..................................... Kalamazoo...................... 2,828 6
Michigan..................................... Kalkaska....................... 1,740 5
Michigan..................................... Kent........................... 3,218 7
Michigan..................................... Keweenaw....................... 1,774 5
Michigan..................................... Lake........................... 1,770 5
Michigan..................................... Lapeer......................... 3,094 7
Michigan..................................... Leelanau....................... 3,747 7
Michigan..................................... Lenawee........................ 2,013 6
Michigan..................................... Livingston..................... 3,826 7
Michigan..................................... Luce........................... 1,094 4
Michigan..................................... Mackinac....................... 1,238 4
Michigan..................................... Macomb......................... 4,886 7
Michigan..................................... Manistee....................... 1,778 5
[[Page 65093]]
Michigan..................................... Marquette...................... 1,306 4
Michigan..................................... Mason.......................... 1,586 5
Michigan..................................... Mecosta........................ 1,762 5
Michigan..................................... Menominee...................... 1,058 4
Michigan..................................... Midland........................ 2,086 6
Michigan..................................... Missaukee...................... 1,759 5
Michigan..................................... Monroe......................... 2,522 6
Michigan..................................... Montcalm....................... 1,764 5
Michigan..................................... Montmorency.................... 1,550 5
Michigan..................................... Muskegon....................... 2,406 6
Michigan..................................... Newaygo........................ 2,151 6
Michigan..................................... Oakland........................ 5,942 8
Michigan..................................... Oceana......................... 2,161 6
Michigan..................................... Ogemaw......................... 1,727 5
Michigan..................................... Ontonagon...................... 910 3
Michigan..................................... Osceola........................ 1,640 5
Michigan..................................... Oscoda......................... 1,776 5
Michigan..................................... Otsego......................... 1,935 5
Michigan..................................... Ottawa......................... 3,482 7
Michigan..................................... Presque Isle................... 1,598 5
Michigan..................................... Roscommon...................... 2,549 6
Michigan..................................... Saginaw........................ 1,654 5
Michigan..................................... Sanilac........................ 1,678 5
Michigan..................................... Schoolcraft.................... 1,310 4
Michigan..................................... Shiawassee..................... 1,730 5
Michigan..................................... St. Clair...................... 3,176 7
Michigan..................................... St. Joseph..................... 1,851 5
Michigan..................................... Tuscola........................ 1,838 5
Michigan..................................... Van Buren...................... 2,245 6
Michigan..................................... Washtenaw...................... 3,791 7
Michigan..................................... Wayne.......................... 5,463 8
Michigan..................................... Wexford........................ 2,223 6
Minnesota.................................... Aitkin......................... 703 3
Minnesota.................................... Anoka.......................... 4,820 7
Minnesota.................................... Becker......................... 761 3
Minnesota.................................... Beltrami....................... 587 3
Minnesota.................................... Benton......................... 1,619 5
Minnesota.................................... Big Stone...................... 833 3
Minnesota.................................... Blue Earth..................... 1,734 5
Minnesota.................................... Brown.......................... 1,574 5
Minnesota.................................... Carlton........................ 829 3
Minnesota.................................... Carver......................... 2,365 6
Minnesota.................................... Cass........................... 766 3
Minnesota.................................... Chippewa....................... 1,202 4
Minnesota.................................... Chisago........................ 2,318 6
Minnesota.................................... Clay........................... 856 3
Minnesota.................................... Clearwater..................... 501 3
Minnesota.................................... Cook........................... 1,411 4
Minnesota.................................... Cottonwood..................... 1,424 4
Minnesota.................................... Crow Wing...................... 884 3
Minnesota.................................... Dakota......................... 2,762 6
Minnesota.................................... Dodge.......................... 1,873 5
Minnesota.................................... Douglas........................ 1,018 4
Minnesota.................................... Faribault...................... 1,683 5
Minnesota.................................... Fillmore....................... 1,403 4
Minnesota.................................... Freeborn....................... 1,758 5
Minnesota.................................... Goodhue........................ 1,917 5
Minnesota.................................... Grant.......................... 1,028 4
Minnesota.................................... Hennepin....................... 4,446 7
Minnesota.................................... Houston........................ 1,044 4
Minnesota.................................... Hubbard........................ 694 3
Minnesota.................................... Isanti......................... 1,835 5
Minnesota.................................... Itasca......................... 798 3
Minnesota.................................... Jackson........................ 1,486 4
Minnesota.................................... Kanabec........................ 1,030 4
Minnesota.................................... Kandiyohi...................... 1,282 4
Minnesota.................................... Kittson........................ 450 2
Minnesota.................................... Koochiching.................... 562 3
Minnesota.................................... Lac qui Parle.................. 978 3
Minnesota.................................... Lake........................... 1,386 4
Minnesota.................................... Lake of the Woods.............. 472 2
[[Page 65094]]
Minnesota.................................... Le Sueur....................... 1,796 5
Minnesota.................................... Lincoln........................ 931 3
Minnesota.................................... Lyon........................... 1,161 4
Minnesota.................................... Mahnomen....................... 537 3
Minnesota.................................... Marshall....................... 489 2
Minnesota.................................... Martin......................... 1,638 5
Minnesota.................................... McLeod......................... 1,676 5
Minnesota.................................... Meeker......................... 1,434 4
Minnesota.................................... Mille Lacs..................... 1,385 4
Minnesota.................................... Morrison....................... 1,070 4
Minnesota.................................... Mower.......................... 1,567 5
Minnesota.................................... Murray......................... 1,236 4
Minnesota.................................... Nicollet....................... 1,810 5
Minnesota.................................... Nobles......................... 1,343 4
Minnesota.................................... Norman......................... 668 3
Minnesota.................................... Olmsted........................ 1,771 5
Minnesota.................................... Otter Tail..................... 838 3
Minnesota.................................... Pennington..................... 419 2
Minnesota.................................... Pine........................... 1,015 4
Minnesota.................................... Pipestone...................... 1,126 4
Minnesota.................................... Polk........................... 662 3
Minnesota.................................... Pope........................... 986 3
Minnesota.................................... Ramsey......................... 15,209 9
Minnesota.................................... Red Lake....................... 504 3
Minnesota.................................... Redwood........................ 1,378 4
Minnesota.................................... Renville....................... 1,511 5
Minnesota.................................... Rice........................... 2,186 6
Minnesota.................................... Rock........................... 1,116 4
Minnesota.................................... Roseau......................... 422 2
Minnesota.................................... Scott.......................... 2,797 6
Minnesota.................................... Sherburne...................... 2,253 6
Minnesota.................................... Sibley......................... 1,787 5
Minnesota.................................... St. Louis...................... 1,102 4
Minnesota.................................... Stearns........................ 1,263 4
Minnesota.................................... Steele......................... 1,701 5
Minnesota.................................... Stevens........................ 1,178 4
Minnesota.................................... Swift.......................... 1,000 3
Minnesota.................................... Todd........................... 931 3
Minnesota.................................... Traverse....................... 905 3
Minnesota.................................... Wabasha........................ 1,500 4
Minnesota.................................... Wadena......................... 812 3
Minnesota.................................... Waseca......................... 1,876 5
Minnesota.................................... Washington..................... 4,160 7
Minnesota.................................... Watonwan....................... 1,486 4
Minnesota.................................... Wilkin......................... 854 3
Minnesota.................................... Winona......................... 1,591 5
Minnesota.................................... Wright......................... 2,218 6
Minnesota.................................... Yellow Medicine................ 1,029 4
Mississippi.................................. Adams.......................... 803 3
Mississippi.................................. Alcorn......................... 1,084 4
Mississippi.................................. Amite.......................... 1,258 4
Mississippi.................................. Attala......................... 1,028 4
Mississippi.................................. Benton......................... 776 3
Mississippi.................................. Bolivar........................ 878 3
Mississippi.................................. Calhoun........................ 762 3
Mississippi.................................. Carroll........................ 793 3
Mississippi.................................. Chickasaw...................... 738 3
Mississippi.................................. Choctaw........................ 939 3
Mississippi.................................. Claiborne...................... 962 3
Mississippi.................................. Clarke......................... 1,368 4
Mississippi.................................. Clay........................... 904 3
Mississippi.................................. Coahoma........................ 926 3
Mississippi.................................. Copiah......................... 1,317 4
Mississippi.................................. Covington...................... 1,258 4
Mississippi.................................. DeSoto......................... 1,569 5
Mississippi.................................. Forrest........................ 2,167 6
Mississippi.................................. Franklin....................... 1,315 4
Mississippi.................................. George......................... 2,418 6
Mississippi.................................. Greene......................... 1,303 4
Mississippi.................................. Grenada........................ 972 3
Mississippi.................................. Hancock........................ 1,901 5
[[Page 65095]]
Mississippi.................................. Harrison....................... 3,082 7
Mississippi.................................. Hinds.......................... 1,078 4
Mississippi.................................. Holmes......................... 984 3
Mississippi.................................. Humphreys...................... 902 3
Mississippi.................................. Issaquena...................... 935 3
Mississippi.................................. Itawamba....................... 899 3
Mississippi.................................. Jackson........................ 3,077 7
Mississippi.................................. Jasper......................... 1,108 4
Mississippi.................................. Jefferson...................... 1,174 4
Mississippi.................................. Jefferson Davis................ 1,060 4
Mississippi.................................. Jones.......................... 1,778 5
Mississippi.................................. Kemper......................... 907 3
Mississippi.................................. Lafayette...................... 1,115 4
Mississippi.................................. Lamar.......................... 1,590 5
Mississippi.................................. Lauderdale..................... 1,114 4
Mississippi.................................. Lawrence....................... 1,249 4
Mississippi.................................. Leake.......................... 1,191 4
Mississippi.................................. Lee............................ 1,070 4
Mississippi.................................. Leflore........................ 888 3
Mississippi.................................. Lincoln........................ 1,804 5
Mississippi.................................. Lowndes........................ 901 3
Mississippi.................................. Madison........................ 1,298 4
Mississippi.................................. Marion......................... 1,085 4
Mississippi.................................. Marshall....................... 1,078 4
Mississippi.................................. Monroe......................... 938 3
Mississippi.................................. Montgomery..................... 727 3
Mississippi.................................. Neshoba........................ 1,706 5
Mississippi.................................. Newton......................... 2,458 6
Mississippi.................................. Noxubee........................ 851 3
Mississippi.................................. Oktibbeha...................... 1,370 4
Mississippi.................................. Panola......................... 885 3
Mississippi.................................. Pearl River.................... 2,229 6
Mississippi.................................. Perry.......................... 1,714 5
Mississippi.................................. Pike........................... 1,542 5
Mississippi.................................. Pontotoc....................... 941 3
Mississippi.................................. Prentiss....................... 739 3
Mississippi.................................. Quitman........................ 787 3
Mississippi.................................. Rankin......................... 1,188 4
Mississippi.................................. Scott.......................... 1,289 4
Mississippi.................................. Sharkey........................ 851 3
Mississippi.................................. Simpson........................ 1,635 5
Mississippi.................................. Smith.......................... 1,568 5
Mississippi.................................. Stone.......................... 1,461 4
Mississippi.................................. Sunflower...................... 850 3
Mississippi.................................. Tallahatchie................... 724 3
Mississippi.................................. Tate........................... 1,359 4
Mississippi.................................. Tippah......................... 990 3
Mississippi.................................. Tishomingo..................... 1,049 4
Mississippi.................................. Tunica......................... 800 3
Mississippi.................................. Union.......................... 1,239 4
Mississippi.................................. Walthall....................... 2,319 6
Mississippi.................................. Warren......................... 876 3
Mississippi.................................. Washington..................... 1,008 4
Mississippi.................................. Wayne.......................... 1,256 4
Mississippi.................................. Webster........................ 654 3
Mississippi.................................. Wilkinson...................... 1,103 4
Mississippi.................................. Winston........................ 1,336 4
Mississippi.................................. Yalobusha...................... 966 3
Mississippi.................................. Yazoo.......................... 882 3
Missouri..................................... Adair.......................... 810 3
Missouri..................................... Andrew......................... 1,470 4
Missouri..................................... Atchison....................... 1,314 4
Missouri..................................... Audrain........................ 1,281 4
Missouri..................................... Barry.......................... 1,342 4
Missouri..................................... Barton......................... 800 3
Missouri..................................... Bates.......................... 959 3
Missouri..................................... Benton......................... 892 3
Missouri..................................... Bollinger...................... 1,034 4
Missouri..................................... Boone.......................... 2,035 6
Missouri..................................... Buchanan....................... 1,432 4
Missouri..................................... Butler......................... 1,199 4
[[Page 65096]]
Missouri..................................... Caldwell....................... 1,095 4
Missouri..................................... Callaway....................... 1,424 4
Missouri..................................... Camden......................... 1,003 4
Missouri..................................... Cape Girardeau................. 1,513 5
Missouri..................................... Carroll........................ 1,036 4
Missouri..................................... Carter......................... 838 3
Missouri..................................... Cass........................... 1,475 4
Missouri..................................... Cedar.......................... 917 3
Missouri..................................... Chariton....................... 1,066 4
Missouri..................................... Christian...................... 1,910 5
Missouri..................................... Clark.......................... 932 3
Missouri..................................... Clay........................... 2,714 6
Missouri..................................... Clinton........................ 1,233 4
Missouri..................................... Cole........................... 1,579 5
Missouri..................................... Cooper......................... 1,066 4
Missouri..................................... Crawford....................... 998 3
Missouri..................................... Dade........................... 1,022 4
Missouri..................................... Dallas......................... 1,117 4
Missouri..................................... Daviess........................ 941 3
Missouri..................................... DeKalb......................... 911 3
Missouri..................................... Dent........................... 793 3
Missouri..................................... Douglas........................ 857 3
Missouri..................................... Dunklin........................ 1,549 5
Missouri..................................... Franklin....................... 1,945 5
Missouri..................................... Gasconade...................... 1,269 4
Missouri..................................... Gentry......................... 925 3
Missouri..................................... Greene......................... 2,639 6
Missouri..................................... Grundy......................... 819 3
Missouri..................................... Harrison....................... 761 3
Missouri..................................... Henry.......................... 967 3
Missouri..................................... Hickory........................ 866 3
Missouri..................................... Holt........................... 1,193 4
Missouri..................................... Howard......................... 1,067 4
Missouri..................................... Howell......................... 1,098 4
Missouri..................................... Iron........................... 1,066 4
Missouri..................................... Jackson........................ 2,940 6
Missouri..................................... Jasper......................... 1,195 4
Missouri..................................... Jefferson...................... 2,108 6
Missouri..................................... Johnson........................ 1,354 4
Missouri..................................... Knox........................... 1,113 4
Missouri..................................... Laclede........................ 1,102 4
Missouri..................................... Lafayette...................... 1,465 4
Missouri..................................... Lawrence....................... 1,422 4
Missouri..................................... Lewis.......................... 885 3
Missouri..................................... Lincoln........................ 1,738 5
Missouri..................................... Linn........................... 804 3
Missouri..................................... Livingston..................... 1,028 4
Missouri..................................... Macon.......................... 858 3
Missouri..................................... Madison........................ 778 3
Missouri..................................... Maries......................... 826 3
Missouri..................................... Marion......................... 981 3
Missouri..................................... McDonald....................... 1,623 5
Missouri..................................... Mercer......................... 4,286 7
Missouri..................................... Miller......................... 1,183 4
Missouri..................................... Mississippi.................... 1,484 4
Missouri..................................... Moniteau....................... 1,104 4
Missouri..................................... Monroe......................... 946 3
Missouri..................................... Montgomery..................... 1,311 4
Missouri..................................... Morgan......................... 1,242 4
Missouri..................................... New Madrid..................... 1,470 4
Missouri..................................... Newton......................... 1,408 4
Missouri..................................... Nodaway........................ 956 3
Missouri..................................... Oregon......................... 803 3
Missouri..................................... Osage.......................... 1,120 4
Missouri..................................... Ozark.......................... 1,093 4
Missouri..................................... Pemiscot....................... 1,418 4
Missouri..................................... Perry.......................... 1,190 4
Missouri..................................... Pettis......................... 1,110 4
Missouri..................................... Phelps......................... 1,215 4
Missouri..................................... Pike........................... 1,294 4
Missouri..................................... Platte......................... 1,845 5
[[Page 65097]]
Missouri..................................... Polk........................... 1,127 4
Missouri..................................... Pulaski........................ 1,048 4
Missouri..................................... Putnam......................... 693 3
Missouri..................................... Ralls.......................... 1,150 4
Missouri..................................... Randolph....................... 939 3
Missouri..................................... Ray............................ 1,192 4
Missouri..................................... Reynolds....................... 838 3
Missouri..................................... Ripley......................... 813 3
Missouri..................................... Saline......................... 1,094 4
Missouri..................................... Schuyler....................... 649 3
Missouri..................................... Scotland....................... 898 3
Missouri..................................... Scott.......................... 1,396 4
Missouri..................................... Shannon........................ 842 3
Missouri..................................... Shelby......................... 950 3
Missouri..................................... St Louis....................... 2,902 6
Missouri..................................... St. Charles.................... 3,193 7
Missouri..................................... St. Clair...................... 814 3
Missouri..................................... St. Francois................... 1,626 5
Missouri..................................... Ste. Genevieve................. 1,157 4
Missouri..................................... Stoddard....................... 1,638 5
Missouri..................................... Stone.......................... 1,542 5
Missouri..................................... Sullivan....................... 651 3
Missouri..................................... Taney.......................... 1,382 4
Missouri..................................... Texas.......................... 822 3
Missouri..................................... Vernon......................... 884 3
Missouri..................................... Warren......................... 1,850 5
Missouri..................................... Washington..................... 1,182 4
Missouri..................................... Wayne.......................... 827 3
Missouri..................................... Webster........................ 1,378 4
Missouri..................................... Worth.......................... 733 3
Missouri..................................... Wright......................... 1,007 4
Montana...................................... Beaverhead..................... 438 2
Montana...................................... Big Horn....................... 197 1
Montana...................................... Blaine......................... 196 1
Montana...................................... Broadwater..................... 371 2
Montana...................................... Carbon......................... 613 3
Montana...................................... Carter......................... 158 1
Montana...................................... Cascade........................ 340 2
Montana...................................... Chouteau....................... 336 2
Montana...................................... Custer......................... 155 1
Montana...................................... Daniels........................ 234 1
Montana...................................... Dawson......................... 175 1
Montana...................................... Deer Lodge..................... 502 3
Montana...................................... Fallon......................... 210 1
Montana...................................... Fergus......................... 297 2
Montana...................................... Flathead....................... 1,875 5
Montana...................................... Gallatin....................... 873 3
Montana...................................... Garfield....................... 132 1
Montana...................................... Glacier........................ 269 2
Montana...................................... Golden Valley.................. 194 1
Montana...................................... Granite........................ 560 3
Montana...................................... Hill........................... 255 2
Montana...................................... Jefferson...................... 482 2
Montana...................................... Judith Basin................... 421 2
Montana...................................... Lake........................... 925 3
Montana...................................... Lewis and Clark................ 452 2
Montana...................................... Liberty........................ 268 2
Montana...................................... Lincoln........................ 2,295 6
Montana...................................... Madison........................ 518 3
Montana...................................... McCone......................... 181 1
Montana...................................... Meagher........................ 347 2
Montana...................................... Mineral........................ 1,550 5
Montana...................................... Missoula....................... 1,150 4
Montana...................................... Musselshell.................... 194 1
Montana...................................... Park........................... 570 3
Montana...................................... Petroleum...................... 222 1
Montana...................................... Phillips....................... 175 1
Montana...................................... Pondera........................ 362 2
Montana...................................... Powder River................... 174 1
Montana...................................... Powell......................... 496 2
Montana...................................... Prairie........................ 169 1
[[Page 65098]]
Montana...................................... Ravalli........................ 2,141 6
Montana...................................... Richland....................... 232 1
Montana...................................... Roosevelt...................... 239 1
Montana...................................... Rosebud........................ 144 1
Montana...................................... Sanders........................ 877 3
Montana...................................... Sheridan....................... 268 2
Montana...................................... Silver Bow..................... 782 3
Montana...................................... Stillwater..................... 384 2
Montana...................................... Sweet Grass.................... 445 2
Montana...................................... Teton.......................... 290 2
Montana...................................... Toole.......................... 280 2
Montana...................................... Treasure....................... 191 1
Montana...................................... Valley......................... 206 1
Montana...................................... Wheatland...................... 228 1
Montana...................................... Wibaux......................... 193 1
Montana...................................... Yellowstone.................... 404 2
Nebraska..................................... Adams.......................... 1,246 4
Nebraska..................................... Antelope....................... 869 3
Nebraska..................................... Arthur......................... 156 1
Nebraska..................................... Banner......................... 245 1
Nebraska..................................... Blaine......................... 193 1
Nebraska..................................... Boone.......................... 922 3
Nebraska..................................... Box Butte...................... 382 2
Nebraska..................................... Boyd........................... 349 2
Nebraska..................................... Brown.......................... 274 2
Nebraska..................................... Buffalo........................ 1,050 4
Nebraska..................................... Burt........................... 1,360 4
Nebraska..................................... Butler......................... 1,522 5
Nebraska..................................... Cass........................... 1,660 5
Nebraska..................................... Cedar.......................... 960 3
Nebraska..................................... Chase.......................... 534 3
Nebraska..................................... Cherry......................... 180 1
Nebraska..................................... Cheyenne....................... 299 2
Nebraska..................................... Clay........................... 1,202 4
Nebraska..................................... Colfax......................... 1,303 4
Nebraska..................................... Cuming......................... 1,257 4
Nebraska..................................... Custer......................... 428 2
Nebraska..................................... Dakota......................... 1,078 4
Nebraska..................................... Dawes.......................... 290 2
Nebraska..................................... Dawson......................... 811 3
Nebraska..................................... Deuel.......................... 344 2
Nebraska..................................... Dixon.......................... 997 3
Nebraska..................................... Dodge.......................... 1,564 5
Nebraska..................................... Douglas........................ 3,120 7
Nebraska..................................... Dundy.......................... 382 2
Nebraska..................................... Fillmore....................... 1,348 4
Nebraska..................................... Franklin....................... 614 3
Nebraska..................................... Frontier....................... 423 2
Nebraska..................................... Furnas......................... 483 2
Nebraska..................................... Gage........................... 874 3
Nebraska..................................... Garden......................... 204 1
Nebraska..................................... Garfield....................... 281 2
Nebraska..................................... Gosper......................... 669 3
Nebraska..................................... Grant.......................... 170 1
Nebraska..................................... Greeley........................ 593 3
Nebraska..................................... Hall........................... 1,329 4
Nebraska..................................... Hamilton....................... 1,473 4
Nebraska..................................... Harlan......................... 571 3
Nebraska..................................... Hayes.......................... 332 2
Nebraska..................................... Hitchcock...................... 390 2
Nebraska..................................... Holt........................... 414 2
Nebraska..................................... Hooker......................... 162 1
Nebraska..................................... Howard......................... 799 3
Nebraska..................................... Jefferson...................... 945 3
Nebraska..................................... Johnson........................ 774 3
Nebraska..................................... Kearney........................ 1,158 4
Nebraska..................................... Keith.......................... 407 2
Nebraska..................................... Keya Paha...................... 276 2
Nebraska..................................... Kimball........................ 247 1
Nebraska..................................... Knox........................... 581 3
Nebraska..................................... Lancaster...................... 1,570 5
[[Page 65099]]
Nebraska..................................... Lincoln........................ 407 2
Nebraska..................................... Logan.......................... 248 1
Nebraska..................................... Loup........................... 223 1
Nebraska..................................... Madison........................ 1,066 4
Nebraska..................................... McPherson...................... 174 1
Nebraska..................................... Merrick........................ 1,071 4
Nebraska..................................... Morrill........................ 262 2
Nebraska..................................... Nance.......................... 734 3
Nebraska..................................... Nemaha......................... 1,017 4
Nebraska..................................... Nuckolls....................... 720 3
Nebraska..................................... Otoe........................... 1,198 4
Nebraska..................................... Pawnee......................... 676 3
Nebraska..................................... Perkins........................ 513 3
Nebraska..................................... Phelps......................... 1,183 4
Nebraska..................................... Pierce......................... 997 3
Nebraska..................................... Platte......................... 1,360 4
Nebraska..................................... Polk........................... 1,481 4
Nebraska..................................... Red Willow..................... 455 2
Nebraska..................................... Richardson..................... 778 3
Nebraska..................................... Rock........................... 255 2
Nebraska..................................... Saline......................... 1,054 4
Nebraska..................................... Sarpy.......................... 2,854 6
Nebraska..................................... Saunders....................... 1,618 5
Nebraska..................................... Scotts Bluff................... 518 3
Nebraska..................................... Seward......................... 1,429 4
Nebraska..................................... Sheridan....................... 202 1
Nebraska..................................... Sherman........................ 497 2
Nebraska..................................... Sioux.......................... 222 1
Nebraska..................................... Stanton........................ 1,054 4
Nebraska..................................... Thayer......................... 1,066 4
Nebraska..................................... Thomas......................... 164 1
Nebraska..................................... Thurston....................... 1,068 4
Nebraska..................................... Valley......................... 539 3
Nebraska..................................... Washington..................... 1,802 5
Nebraska..................................... Wayne.......................... 1,166 4
Nebraska..................................... Webster........................ 680 3
Nebraska..................................... Wheeler........................ 420 2
Nebraska..................................... York........................... 1,607 5
Nevada....................................... Carson City.................... 2,588 6
Nevada....................................... Churchill...................... 1,250 4
Nevada....................................... Clark.......................... 2,854 6
Nevada....................................... Douglas........................ 672 3
Nevada....................................... Elko........................... 131 1
Nevada....................................... Esmeralda...................... 834 3
Nevada....................................... Eureka......................... 184 1
Nevada....................................... Humboldt....................... 304 2
Nevada....................................... Lander......................... 198 1
Nevada....................................... Lincoln........................ 846 3
Nevada....................................... Lyon........................... 1,124 4
Nevada....................................... Mineral........................ 154 1
Nevada....................................... Nye............................ 835 3
Nevada....................................... Pershing....................... 544 3
Nevada....................................... Storey......................... 25,714 10
Nevada....................................... Washoe......................... 476 2
Nevada....................................... White Pine..................... 435 2
New Hampshire................................ Belknap........................ 2,755 6
New Hampshire................................ Carroll........................ 2,266 6
New Hampshire................................ Cheshire....................... 2,541 6
New Hampshire................................ Coos........................... 957 3
New Hampshire................................ Grafton........................ 1,718 5
New Hampshire................................ Hillsborough................... 4,495 7
New Hampshire................................ Merrimack...................... 2,146 6
New Hampshire................................ Rockingham..................... 5,459 8
New Hampshire................................ Strafford...................... 2,328 6
New Hampshire................................ Sullivan....................... 2,047 6
New Jersey................................... Atlantic....................... 4,637 7
New Jersey................................... Bergen......................... 38,527 11
New Jersey................................... Burlington..................... 5,422 8
New Jersey................................... Camden......................... 9,157 8
New Jersey................................... Cape May....................... 5,639 8
New Jersey................................... Cumberland..................... 3,771 7
[[Page 65100]]
New Jersey................................... Essex.......................... 36,694 11
New Jersey................................... Gloucester..................... 7,588 8
New Jersey................................... Hudson *....................... 7,396 8
New Jersey................................... Hunterdon...................... 9,595 8
New Jersey................................... Mercer......................... 15,084 9
New Jersey................................... Middlesex...................... 11,731 9
New Jersey................................... Monmouth....................... 13,750 9
New Jersey................................... Morris......................... 21,135 10
New Jersey................................... Ocean.......................... 11,618 9
New Jersey................................... Passaic........................ 25,729 10
New Jersey................................... Salem.......................... 3,658 7
New Jersey................................... Somerset....................... 11,552 9
New Jersey................................... Sussex......................... 5,709 8
New Jersey................................... Union.......................... 74,526 12
New Jersey................................... Warren......................... 5,942 8
New Mexico................................... Bernalillo..................... 382 2
New Mexico................................... Catron......................... 109 1
New Mexico................................... Chaves......................... 170 1
New Mexico................................... Cibola......................... 122 1
New Mexico................................... Colfax......................... 179 1
New Mexico................................... Curry.......................... 421 2
New Mexico................................... De Baca........................ 103 1
New Mexico................................... Dona Ana....................... 1,252 4
New Mexico................................... Eddy........................... 204 1
New Mexico................................... Grant.......................... 149 1
New Mexico................................... Guadalupe...................... 83 1
New Mexico................................... Harding *...................... 187 1
New Mexico................................... Hidalgo........................ 111 1
New Mexico................................... Lea............................ 125 1
New Mexico................................... Lincoln........................ 147 1
New Mexico................................... Los Alamos *................... 187 1
New Mexico................................... Luna........................... 182 1
New Mexico................................... McKinley....................... 60 1
New Mexico................................... Mora........................... 247 1
New Mexico................................... Otero.......................... 193 1
New Mexico................................... Quay........................... 144 1
New Mexico................................... Rio Arriba..................... 262 2
New Mexico................................... Roosevelt...................... 212 1
New Mexico................................... San Juan....................... 259 2
New Mexico................................... San Miguel..................... 200 1
New Mexico................................... Sandoval....................... 157 1
New Mexico................................... Santa Fe....................... 388 2
New Mexico................................... Sierra......................... 140 1
New Mexico................................... Socorro........................ 166 1
New Mexico................................... Taos........................... 470 2
New Mexico................................... Torrance....................... 154 1
New Mexico................................... Union.......................... 160 1
New Mexico................................... Valencia....................... 534 3
New York..................................... Albany......................... 2,548 6
New York..................................... Allegany....................... 845 3
New York..................................... Bronx *........................ 1,366 4
New York..................................... Broome......................... 2,362 6
New York..................................... Cattaraugus.................... 1,034 4
New York..................................... Cayuga......................... 1,218 4
New York..................................... Chautauqua..................... 1,121 4
New York..................................... Chemung........................ 1,104 4
New York..................................... Chenango....................... 886 3
New York..................................... Clinton........................ 865 3
New York..................................... Columbia....................... 2,532 6
New York..................................... Cortland....................... 859 3
New York..................................... Delaware....................... 1,366 4
New York..................................... Dutchess....................... 5,033 8
New York..................................... Erie........................... 1,478 4
New York..................................... Essex.......................... 1,148 4
New York..................................... Franklin....................... 777 3
New York..................................... Fulton......................... 1,298 4
New York..................................... Genesee........................ 1,116 4
New York..................................... Greene......................... 1,704 5
New York..................................... Hamilton *..................... 1,366 4
New York..................................... Herkimer....................... 937 3
New York..................................... Jefferson...................... 698 3
[[Page 65101]]
New York..................................... Kings *........................ 1,366 4
New York..................................... Lewis.......................... 656 3
New York..................................... Livingston..................... 1,169 4
New York..................................... Madison........................ 1,014 4
New York..................................... Monroe......................... 1,575 5
New York..................................... Montgomery..................... 1,194 4
New York..................................... Nassau......................... 24,317 10
New York..................................... New York....................... 6,000 8
New York..................................... Niagara........................ 1,353 4
New York..................................... Oneida......................... 945 3
New York..................................... Onondaga....................... 1,187 4
New York..................................... Ontario........................ 1,343 4
New York..................................... Orange......................... 3,471 7
New York..................................... Orleans........................ 993 3
New York..................................... Oswego......................... 1,820 5
New York..................................... Otsego......................... 1,346 4
New York..................................... Putnam......................... 7,612 8
New York..................................... Queens......................... 1,366 4
New York..................................... Rensselaer..................... 2,076 6
New York..................................... Richmond....................... 79,163 12
New York..................................... Rockland....................... 20,123 10
New York..................................... Saratoga....................... 2,254 6
New York..................................... Schenectady.................... 1,706 5
New York..................................... Schoharie...................... 1,374 4
New York..................................... Schuyler....................... 1,244 4
New York..................................... Seneca......................... 1,204 4
New York..................................... St. Lawrence................... 597 3
New York..................................... Steuben........................ 882 3
New York..................................... Suffolk........................ 14,506 9
New York..................................... Sullivan....................... 2,238 6
New York..................................... Tioga.......................... 1,108 4
New York..................................... Tompkins....................... 1,349 4
New York..................................... Ulster......................... 2,831 6
New York..................................... Warren......................... 2,509 6
New York..................................... Washington..................... 1,085 4
New York..................................... Wayne.......................... 1,990 5
New York..................................... Westchester.................... 12,075 9
New York..................................... Wyoming........................ 1,073 4
New York..................................... Yates.......................... 1,490 4
North Carolina............................... Alamance....................... 3,094 7
North Carolina............................... Alexander...................... 3,703 7
North Carolina............................... Alleghany...................... 2,761 6
North Carolina............................... Anson.......................... 2,219 6
North Carolina............................... Ashe........................... 3,330 7
North Carolina............................... Avery.......................... 3,490 7
North Carolina............................... Beaufort....................... 1,538 5
North Carolina............................... Bertie......................... 1,611 5
North Carolina............................... Bladen......................... 2,363 6
North Carolina............................... Brunswick...................... 2,546 6
North Carolina............................... Buncombe....................... 3,589 7
North Carolina............................... Burke.......................... 3,224 7
North Carolina............................... Cabarrus....................... 3,922 7
North Carolina............................... Caldwell....................... 3,879 7
North Carolina............................... Camden......................... 1,507 5
North Carolina............................... Carteret....................... 1,680 5
North Carolina............................... Caswell........................ 2,075 6
North Carolina............................... Catawba........................ 2,882 6
North Carolina............................... Chatham........................ 2,710 6
North Carolina............................... Cherokee....................... 3,951 7
North Carolina............................... Chowan......................... 1,906 5
North Carolina............................... Clay........................... 4,134 7
North Carolina............................... Cleveland...................... 2,442 6
North Carolina............................... Columbus....................... 1,768 5
North Carolina............................... Craven......................... 1,922 5
North Carolina............................... Cumberland..................... 2,024 6
North Carolina............................... Currituck...................... 2,408 6
North Carolina............................... Dare........................... 1,014 4
North Carolina............................... Davidson....................... 3,185 7
North Carolina............................... Davie.......................... 3,317 7
North Carolina............................... Duplin......................... 2,367 6
North Carolina............................... Durham......................... 4,333 7
[[Page 65102]]
North Carolina............................... Edgecombe...................... 1,659 5
North Carolina............................... Forsyth........................ 3,647 7
North Carolina............................... Franklin....................... 2,314 6
North Carolina............................... Gaston......................... 3,374 7
North Carolina............................... Gates.......................... 1,471 4
North Carolina............................... Graham......................... 2,985 6
North Carolina............................... Granville...................... 2,161 6
North Carolina............................... Greene......................... 2,396 6
North Carolina............................... Guilford....................... 4,057 7
North Carolina............................... Halifax........................ 1,448 4
North Carolina............................... Harnett........................ 2,837 6
North Carolina............................... Haywood........................ 3,717 7
North Carolina............................... Henderson...................... 4,194 7
North Carolina............................... Hertford....................... 1,547 5
North Carolina............................... Hoke........................... 2,152 6
North Carolina............................... Hyde........................... 1,455 4
North Carolina............................... Iredell........................ 3,653 7
North Carolina............................... Jackson........................ 4,878 7
North Carolina............................... Johnston....................... 2,866 6
North Carolina............................... Jones.......................... 1,847 5
North Carolina............................... Lee............................ 2,574 6
North Carolina............................... Lenoir......................... 2,661 6
North Carolina............................... Lincoln........................ 3,176 7
North Carolina............................... Macon.......................... 4,831 7
North Carolina............................... Madison........................ 3,154 7
North Carolina............................... Martin......................... 1,702 5
North Carolina............................... McDowell....................... 2,684 6
North Carolina............................... Mecklenburg.................... 7,693 8
North Carolina............................... Mitchell....................... 3,465 7
North Carolina............................... Montgomery..................... 2,670 6
North Carolina............................... Moore.......................... 2,422 6
North Carolina............................... Nash........................... 2,002 6
North Carolina............................... New Hanover.................... 7,981 8
North Carolina............................... Northampton.................... 1,609 5
North Carolina............................... Onslow......................... 2,359 6
North Carolina............................... Orange......................... 3,899 7
North Carolina............................... Pamlico........................ 1,565 5
North Carolina............................... Pasquotank..................... 1,552 5
North Carolina............................... Pender......................... 2,494 6
North Carolina............................... Perquimans..................... 1,828 5
North Carolina............................... Person......................... 1,970 5
North Carolina............................... Pitt........................... 1,911 5
North Carolina............................... Polk........................... 3,746 7
North Carolina............................... Randolph....................... 3,051 7
North Carolina............................... Richmond....................... 1,986 5
North Carolina............................... Robeson........................ 1,595 5
North Carolina............................... Rockingham..................... 2,132 6
North Carolina............................... Rowan.......................... 2,876 6
North Carolina............................... Rutherford..................... 2,428 6
North Carolina............................... Sampson........................ 2,467 6
North Carolina............................... Scotland....................... 1,775 5
North Carolina............................... Stanly......................... 2,920 6
North Carolina............................... Stokes......................... 2,325 6
North Carolina............................... Surry.......................... 2,917 6
North Carolina............................... Swain.......................... 3,569 7
North Carolina............................... Transylvania................... 5,134 8
North Carolina............................... Tyrrell........................ 1,447 4
North Carolina............................... Union.......................... 2,950 6
North Carolina............................... Vance.......................... 1,714 5
North Carolina............................... Wake........................... 5,110 8
North Carolina............................... Warren......................... 1,717 5
North Carolina............................... Washington..................... 1,563 5
North Carolina............................... Watauga........................ 3,221 7
North Carolina............................... Wayne.......................... 2,530 6
North Carolina............................... Wilkes......................... 2,398 6
North Carolina............................... Wilson......................... 1,977 5
North Carolina............................... Yadkin......................... 2,606 6
North Carolina............................... Yancey......................... 3,702 7
North Dakota................................. Adams.......................... 200 1
North Dakota................................. Barnes......................... 358 2
North Dakota................................. Benson......................... 284 2
[[Page 65103]]
North Dakota................................. Billings....................... 200 1
North Dakota................................. Bottineau...................... 327 2
North Dakota................................. Bowman......................... 199 1
North Dakota................................. Burke.......................... 236 1
North Dakota................................. Burleigh....................... 271 2
North Dakota................................. Cass........................... 701 3
North Dakota................................. Cavalier....................... 434 2
North Dakota................................. Dickey......................... 402 2
North Dakota................................. Divide......................... 228 1
North Dakota................................. Dunn........................... 202 1
North Dakota................................. Eddy........................... 252 2
North Dakota................................. Emmons......................... 224 1
North Dakota................................. Foster......................... 319 2
North Dakota................................. Golden Valley.................. 197 1
North Dakota................................. Grand Forks.................... 634 3
North Dakota................................. Grant.......................... 247 1
North Dakota................................. Griggs......................... 283 2
North Dakota................................. Hettinger...................... 269 2
North Dakota................................. Kidder......................... 225 1
North Dakota................................. LaMoure........................ 446 2
North Dakota................................. Logan.......................... 196 1
North Dakota................................. McHenry........................ 263 2
North Dakota................................. McIntosh....................... 230 1
North Dakota................................. McKenzie....................... 243 1
North Dakota................................. McLean......................... 342 2
North Dakota................................. Mercer......................... 214 1
North Dakota................................. Morton......................... 242 1
North Dakota................................. Mountrail...................... 245 1
North Dakota................................. Nelson......................... 276 2
North Dakota................................. Oliver......................... 194 1
North Dakota................................. Pembina........................ 612 3
North Dakota................................. Pierce......................... 277 2
North Dakota................................. Ramsey......................... 294 2
North Dakota................................. Ransom......................... 416 2
North Dakota................................. Renville....................... 429 2
North Dakota................................. Richland....................... 756 3
North Dakota................................. Rolette........................ 263 2
North Dakota................................. Sargent........................ 434 2
North Dakota................................. Sheridan....................... 225 1
North Dakota................................. Sioux.......................... 161 1
North Dakota................................. Slope.......................... 195 1
North Dakota................................. Stark.......................... 259 2
North Dakota................................. Steele......................... 462 2
North Dakota................................. Stutsman....................... 326 2
North Dakota................................. Towner......................... 287 2
North Dakota................................. Traill......................... 674 3
North Dakota................................. Walsh.......................... 575 3
North Dakota................................. Ward........................... 335 2
North Dakota................................. Wells.......................... 300 2
North Dakota................................. Williams....................... 258 2
Ohio......................................... Adams.......................... 1,512 5
Ohio......................................... Allen.......................... 2,425 6
Ohio......................................... Ashland........................ 2,312 6
Ohio......................................... Ashtabula...................... 1,919 5
Ohio......................................... Athens......................... 1,424 4
Ohio......................................... Auglaize....................... 2,346 6
Ohio......................................... Belmont........................ 1,315 4
Ohio......................................... Brown.......................... 1,894 5
Ohio......................................... Butler......................... 3,289 7
Ohio......................................... Carroll........................ 1,673 5
Ohio......................................... Champaign...................... 2,274 6
Ohio......................................... Clark.......................... 2,831 6
Ohio......................................... Clermont....................... 2,889 6
Ohio......................................... Clinton........................ 2,320 6
Ohio......................................... Columbiana..................... 2,317 6
Ohio......................................... Coshocton...................... 1,822 5
Ohio......................................... Crawford....................... 1,950 5
Ohio......................................... Cuyahoga....................... 17,394 9
Ohio......................................... Darke.......................... 2,536 6
Ohio......................................... Defiance....................... 1,655 5
Ohio......................................... Delaware....................... 3,034 7
[[Page 65104]]
Ohio......................................... Erie........................... 2,494 6
Ohio......................................... Fairfield...................... 2,659 6
Ohio......................................... Fayette........................ 1,938 5
Ohio......................................... Franklin....................... 3,747 7
Ohio......................................... Fulton......................... 2,123 6
Ohio......................................... Gallia......................... 1,439 4
Ohio......................................... Geauga......................... 4,966 7
Ohio......................................... Greene......................... 2,466 6
Ohio......................................... Guernsey....................... 1,532 5
Ohio......................................... Hamilton....................... 4,110 7
Ohio......................................... Hancock........................ 1,939 5
Ohio......................................... Hardin......................... 1,755 5
Ohio......................................... Harrison....................... 926 3
Ohio......................................... Henry.......................... 2,018 6
Ohio......................................... Highland....................... 1,962 5
Ohio......................................... Hocking........................ 2,013 6
Ohio......................................... Holmes......................... 2,787 6
Ohio......................................... Huron.......................... 2,217 6
Ohio......................................... Jackson........................ 1,094 4
Ohio......................................... Jefferson...................... 1,493 4
Ohio......................................... Knox........................... 2,302 6
Ohio......................................... Lake........................... 6,431 8
Ohio......................................... Lawrence....................... 1,428 4
Ohio......................................... Licking........................ 2,814 6
Ohio......................................... Logan.......................... 1,718 5
Ohio......................................... Lorain......................... 2,531 6
Ohio......................................... Lucas.......................... 2,692 6
Ohio......................................... Madison........................ 2,479 6
Ohio......................................... Mahoning....................... 2,488 6
Ohio......................................... Marion......................... 1,783 5
Ohio......................................... Medina......................... 3,881 7
Ohio......................................... Meigs.......................... 1,385 4
Ohio......................................... Mercer......................... 2,606 6
Ohio......................................... Miami.......................... 2,620 6
Ohio......................................... Monroe......................... 1,126 4
Ohio......................................... Montgomery..................... 3,101 7
Ohio......................................... Morgan......................... 1,174 4
Ohio......................................... Morrow......................... 1,971 5
Ohio......................................... Muskingum...................... 1,539 5
Ohio......................................... Noble.......................... 1,289 4
Ohio......................................... Ottawa......................... 1,742 5
Ohio......................................... Paulding....................... 1,672 5
Ohio......................................... Perry.......................... 1,809 5
Ohio......................................... Pickaway....................... 2,386 6
Ohio......................................... Pike........................... 1,322 4
Ohio......................................... Portage........................ 3,396 7
Ohio......................................... Preble......................... 2,008 6
Ohio......................................... Putnam......................... 1,909 5
Ohio......................................... Richland....................... 2,187 6
Ohio......................................... Ross........................... 1,652 5
Ohio......................................... Sandusky....................... 1,840 5
Ohio......................................... Scioto......................... 1,295 4
Ohio......................................... Seneca......................... 1,877 5
Ohio......................................... Shelby......................... 2,194 6
Ohio......................................... Stark.......................... 3,231 7
Ohio......................................... Summit......................... 4,578 7
Ohio......................................... Trumbull....................... 2,414 6
Ohio......................................... Tuscarawas..................... 2,285 6
Ohio......................................... Union.......................... 2,050 6
Ohio......................................... Van Wert....................... 2,079 6
Ohio......................................... Vinton......................... 1,651 5
Ohio......................................... Warren......................... 3,881 7
Ohio......................................... Washington..................... 1,576 5
Ohio......................................... Wayne.......................... 3,568 7
Ohio......................................... Williams....................... 1,799 5
Ohio......................................... Wood........................... 2,211 6
Ohio......................................... Wyandot........................ 2,227 6
Oklahoma..................................... Adair.......................... 943 3
Oklahoma..................................... Alfalfa........................ 565 3
Oklahoma..................................... Atoka.......................... 502 3
Oklahoma..................................... Beaver......................... 292 2
[[Page 65105]]
Oklahoma..................................... Beckham........................ 460 2
Oklahoma..................................... Blaine......................... 490 2
Oklahoma..................................... Bryan.......................... 694 3
Oklahoma..................................... Caddo.......................... 495 2
Oklahoma..................................... Canadian....................... 800 3
Oklahoma..................................... Carter......................... 610 3
Oklahoma..................................... Cherokee....................... 925 3
Oklahoma..................................... Choctaw........................ 486 2
Oklahoma..................................... Cimarron....................... 241 1
Oklahoma..................................... Cleveland...................... 1,490 4
Oklahoma..................................... Coal........................... 507 3
Oklahoma..................................... Comanche....................... 614 3
Oklahoma..................................... Cotton......................... 418 2
Oklahoma..................................... Craig.......................... 616 3
Oklahoma..................................... Creek.......................... 725 3
Oklahoma..................................... Custer......................... 463 2
Oklahoma..................................... Delaware....................... 1,206 4
Oklahoma..................................... Dewey.......................... 417 2
Oklahoma..................................... Ellis.......................... 262 2
Oklahoma..................................... Garfield....................... 547 3
Oklahoma..................................... Garvin......................... 658 3
Oklahoma..................................... Grady.......................... 631 3
Oklahoma..................................... Grant.......................... 466 2
Oklahoma..................................... Greer.......................... 317 2
Oklahoma..................................... Harmon......................... 292 2
Oklahoma..................................... Harper......................... 264 2
Oklahoma..................................... Haskell........................ 704 3
Oklahoma..................................... Hughes......................... 485 2
Oklahoma..................................... Jackson........................ 418 2
Oklahoma..................................... Jefferson...................... 401 2
Oklahoma..................................... Johnston....................... 601 3
Oklahoma..................................... Kay............................ 590 3
Oklahoma..................................... Kingfisher..................... 603 3
Oklahoma..................................... Kiowa.......................... 402 2
Oklahoma..................................... Latimer........................ 512 3
Oklahoma..................................... Le Flore....................... 976 3
Oklahoma..................................... Lincoln........................ 698 3
Oklahoma..................................... Logan.......................... 780 3
Oklahoma..................................... Love........................... 635 3
Oklahoma..................................... Major.......................... 446 2
Oklahoma..................................... Marshall....................... 539 3
Oklahoma..................................... Mayes.......................... 994 3
Oklahoma..................................... McClain........................ 919 3
Oklahoma..................................... McCurtain...................... 763 3
Oklahoma..................................... McIntosh....................... 618 3
Oklahoma..................................... Murray......................... 554 3
Oklahoma..................................... Muskogee....................... 724 3
Oklahoma..................................... Noble.......................... 574 3
Oklahoma..................................... Nowata......................... 609 3
Oklahoma..................................... Okfuskee....................... 617 3
Oklahoma..................................... Oklahoma....................... 1,542 5
Oklahoma..................................... Okmulgee....................... 725 3
Oklahoma..................................... Osage.......................... 434 2
Oklahoma..................................... Ottawa......................... 1,014 4
Oklahoma..................................... Pawnee......................... 476 2
Oklahoma..................................... Payne.......................... 804 3
Oklahoma..................................... Pittsburg...................... 605 3
Oklahoma..................................... Pontotoc....................... 646 3
Oklahoma..................................... Pottawatomie................... 793 3
Oklahoma..................................... Pushmataha..................... 444 2
Oklahoma..................................... Roger Mills.................... 312 2
Oklahoma..................................... Rogers......................... 1,124 4
Oklahoma..................................... Seminole....................... 594 3
Oklahoma..................................... Sequoyah....................... 1,029 4
Oklahoma..................................... Stephens....................... 541 3
Oklahoma..................................... Texas.......................... 415 2
Oklahoma..................................... Tillman........................ 438 2
Oklahoma..................................... Tulsa.......................... 1,698 5
Oklahoma..................................... Wagoner........................ 1,075 4
Oklahoma..................................... Washington..................... 824 3
Oklahoma..................................... Washita........................ 472 2
[[Page 65106]]
Oklahoma..................................... Woods.......................... 389 2
Oklahoma..................................... Woodward....................... 364 2
Oregon....................................... Baker.......................... 437 2
Oregon....................................... Benton......................... 3,083 7
Oregon....................................... Clackamas...................... 7,680 8
Oregon....................................... Clatsop........................ 2,221 6
Oregon....................................... Columbia....................... 3,050 7
Oregon....................................... Coos........................... 2,691 6
Oregon....................................... Crook.......................... 425 2
Oregon....................................... Curry.......................... 1,559 5
Oregon....................................... Deschutes...................... 4,138 7
Oregon....................................... Douglas........................ 1,648 5
Oregon....................................... Gilliam........................ 244 1
Oregon....................................... Grant.......................... 245 1
Oregon....................................... Harney......................... 231 1
Oregon....................................... Hood River..................... 7,491 8
Oregon....................................... Jackson........................ 2,259 6
Oregon....................................... Jefferson...................... 449 2
Oregon....................................... Josephine...................... 3,322 7
Oregon....................................... Klamath........................ 810 3
Oregon....................................... Lake........................... 390 2
Oregon....................................... Lane........................... 3,658 7
Oregon....................................... Lincoln........................ 2,086 6
Oregon....................................... Linn........................... 2,279 6
Oregon....................................... Malheur........................ 430 2
Oregon....................................... Marion......................... 4,086 7
Oregon....................................... Morrow......................... 292 2
Oregon....................................... Multnomah...................... 8,701 8
Oregon....................................... Polk........................... 3,958 7
Oregon....................................... Sherman........................ 294 2
Oregon....................................... Tillamook...................... 4,207 7
Oregon....................................... Umatilla....................... 612 3
Oregon....................................... Union.......................... 835 3
Oregon....................................... Wallowa........................ 491 2
Oregon....................................... Wasco.......................... 315 2
Oregon....................................... Washington..................... 5,835 8
Oregon....................................... Wheeler........................ 219 1
Oregon....................................... Yamhill........................ 5,508 8
Pennsylvania................................. Adams.......................... 3,025 7
Pennsylvania................................. Allegheny...................... 3,810 7
Pennsylvania................................. Armstrong...................... 1,866 5
Pennsylvania................................. Beaver......................... 2,381 6
Pennsylvania................................. Bedford........................ 1,584 5
Pennsylvania................................. Berks.......................... 4,422 7
Pennsylvania................................. Blair.......................... 2,501 6
Pennsylvania................................. Bradford....................... 1,432 4
Pennsylvania................................. Bucks.......................... 7,534 8
Pennsylvania................................. Butler......................... 3,160 7
Pennsylvania................................. Cambria........................ 2,150 6
Pennsylvania................................. Cameron........................ 1,502 5
Pennsylvania................................. Carbon......................... 3,549 7
Pennsylvania................................. Centre......................... 2,720 6
Pennsylvania................................. Chester........................ 8,286 8
Pennsylvania................................. Clarion........................ 1,470 4
Pennsylvania................................. Clearfield..................... 1,320 4
Pennsylvania................................. Clinton........................ 2,243 6
Pennsylvania................................. Columbia....................... 2,510 6
Pennsylvania................................. Crawford....................... 1,390 4
Pennsylvania................................. Cumberland..................... 3,061 7
Pennsylvania................................. Dauphin........................ 4,233 7
Pennsylvania................................. Delaware....................... 18,282 9
Pennsylvania................................. Elk............................ 2,483 6
Pennsylvania................................. Erie........................... 1,856 5
Pennsylvania................................. Fayette........................ 1,475 4
Pennsylvania................................. Forest......................... 1,606 5
Pennsylvania................................. Franklin....................... 3,103 7
Pennsylvania................................. Fulton......................... 1,854 5
Pennsylvania................................. Greene......................... 947 3
Pennsylvania................................. Huntingdon..................... 1,949 5
Pennsylvania................................. Indiana........................ 1,503 5
Pennsylvania................................. Jefferson...................... 1,485 4
[[Page 65107]]
Pennsylvania................................. Juniata........................ 2,447 6
Pennsylvania................................. Lackawanna..................... 2,564 6
Pennsylvania................................. Lancaster...................... 6,364 8
Pennsylvania................................. Lawrence....................... 1,953 5
Pennsylvania................................. Lebanon........................ 4,279 7
Pennsylvania................................. Lehigh......................... 3,603 7
Pennsylvania................................. Luzerne........................ 2,833 6
Pennsylvania................................. Lycoming....................... 1,854 5
Pennsylvania................................. McKean......................... 943 3
Pennsylvania................................. Mercer......................... 1,656 5
Pennsylvania................................. Mifflin........................ 2,551 6
Pennsylvania................................. Monroe......................... 4,153 7
Pennsylvania................................. Montgomery..................... 10,198 9
Pennsylvania................................. Montour........................ 2,397 6
Pennsylvania................................. Northampton.................... 3,890 7
Pennsylvania................................. Northumberland................. 2,479 6
Pennsylvania................................. Perry.......................... 2,562 6
Pennsylvania................................. Philadelphia................... 20,872 10
Pennsylvania................................. Pike........................... 2,302 6
Pennsylvania................................. Potter......................... 1,342 4
Pennsylvania................................. Schuylkill..................... 2,706 6
Pennsylvania................................. Snyder......................... 2,846 6
Pennsylvania................................. Somerset....................... 1,516 5
Pennsylvania................................. Sullivan....................... 1,502 5
Pennsylvania................................. Susquehanna.................... 1,730 5
Pennsylvania................................. Tioga.......................... 1,862 5
Pennsylvania................................. Union.......................... 3,325 7
Pennsylvania................................. Venango........................ 1,191 4
Pennsylvania................................. Warren......................... 1,030 4
Pennsylvania................................. Washington..................... 1,676 5
Pennsylvania................................. Wayne.......................... 1,689 5
Pennsylvania................................. Westmoreland................... 2,251 6
Pennsylvania................................. Wyoming........................ 1,821 5
Pennsylvania................................. York........................... 3,844 7
Puerto Rico.................................. All Areas...................... 4,693 7
Rhode Island................................. Bristol........................ 17,945 9
Rhode Island................................. Kent........................... 5,242 8
Rhode Island................................. Newport........................ 10,690 9
Rhode Island................................. Providence..................... 7,186 8
Rhode Island................................. Washington..................... 6,194 8
South Carolina............................... Abbeville...................... 1,623 5
South Carolina............................... Aiken.......................... 1,775 5
South Carolina............................... Allendale...................... 1,002 4
South Carolina............................... Anderson....................... 2,651 6
South Carolina............................... Bamberg........................ 1,051 4
South Carolina............................... Barnwell....................... 1,045 4
South Carolina............................... Beaufort....................... 1,978 5
South Carolina............................... Berkeley....................... 2,196 6
South Carolina............................... Calhoun........................ 1,182 4
South Carolina............................... Charleston..................... 3,974 7
South Carolina............................... Cherokee....................... 1,624 5
South Carolina............................... Chester........................ 1,598 5
South Carolina............................... Chesterfield................... 1,126 4
South Carolina............................... Clarendon...................... 1,132 4
South Carolina............................... Colleton....................... 1,400 4
South Carolina............................... Darlington..................... 797 3
South Carolina............................... Dillon......................... 1,113 4
South Carolina............................... Dorchester..................... 1,588 5
South Carolina............................... Edgefield...................... 1,626 5
South Carolina............................... Fairfield...................... 1,194 4
South Carolina............................... Florence....................... 1,256 4
South Carolina............................... Georgetown..................... 1,698 5
South Carolina............................... Greenville..................... 2,722 6
South Carolina............................... Greenwood...................... 1,486 4
South Carolina............................... Hampton........................ 1,198 4
South Carolina............................... Horry.......................... 1,737 5
South Carolina............................... Jasper......................... 1,163 4
South Carolina............................... Kershaw........................ 1,693 5
South Carolina............................... Lancaster...................... 1,763 5
South Carolina............................... Laurens........................ 1,789 5
South Carolina............................... Lee............................ 1,105 4
[[Page 65108]]
South Carolina............................... Lexington...................... 2,224 6
South Carolina............................... Marion......................... 1,202 4
South Carolina............................... Marlboro....................... 963 3
South Carolina............................... McCormick...................... 2,101 6
South Carolina............................... Newberry....................... 1,642 5
South Carolina............................... Oconee......................... 3,834 7
South Carolina............................... Orangeburg..................... 1,097 4
South Carolina............................... Pickens........................ 3,722 7
South Carolina............................... Richland....................... 2,637 6
South Carolina............................... Saluda......................... 1,613 5
South Carolina............................... Spartanburg.................... 3,223 7
South Carolina............................... Sumter......................... 1,566 5
South Carolina............................... Union.......................... 1,398 4
South Carolina............................... Williamsburg................... 1,324 4
South Carolina............................... York........................... 3,254 7
South Dakota................................. Aurora......................... 474 2
South Dakota................................. Beadle......................... 430 2
South Dakota................................. Bennett........................ 193 1
South Dakota................................. Bon Homme...................... 630 3
South Dakota................................. Brookings...................... 697 3
South Dakota................................. Brown.......................... 590 3
South Dakota................................. Brule.......................... 394 2
South Dakota................................. Buffalo........................ 218 1
South Dakota................................. Butte.......................... 210 1
South Dakota................................. Campbell....................... 251 2
South Dakota................................. Charles Mix.................... 477 2
South Dakota................................. Clark.......................... 506 3
South Dakota................................. Clay........................... 1,021 4
South Dakota................................. Codington...................... 590 3
South Dakota................................. Corson......................... 138 1
South Dakota................................. Custer......................... 310 2
South Dakota................................. Davison........................ 567 3
South Dakota................................. Day............................ 481 2
South Dakota................................. Deuel.......................... 566 3
South Dakota................................. Dewey.......................... 170 1
South Dakota................................. Douglas........................ 525 3
South Dakota................................. Edmunds........................ 372 2
South Dakota................................. Fall River..................... 203 1
South Dakota................................. Faulk.......................... 313 2
South Dakota................................. Grant.......................... 582 3
South Dakota................................. Gregory........................ 317 2
South Dakota................................. Haakon......................... 174 1
South Dakota................................. Hamlin......................... 634 3
South Dakota................................. Hand........................... 278 2
South Dakota................................. Hanson......................... 616 3
South Dakota................................. Harding........................ 119 1
South Dakota................................. Hughes......................... 353 2
South Dakota................................. Hutchinson..................... 640 3
South Dakota................................. Hyde........................... 242 1
South Dakota................................. Jackson........................ 160 1
South Dakota................................. Jerauld........................ 321 2
South Dakota................................. Jones.......................... 214 1
South Dakota................................. Kingsbury...................... 594 3
South Dakota................................. Lake........................... 786 3
South Dakota................................. Lawrence....................... 579 3
South Dakota................................. Lincoln........................ 1,338 4
South Dakota................................. Lyman.......................... 275 2
South Dakota................................. Marshall....................... 482 2
South Dakota................................. McCook......................... 688 3
South Dakota................................. McPherson...................... 277 2
South Dakota................................. Meade.......................... 214 1
South Dakota................................. Mellette....................... 166 1
South Dakota................................. Miner.......................... 556 3
South Dakota................................. Minnehaha...................... 1,169 4
South Dakota................................. Moody.......................... 964 3
South Dakota................................. Pennington..................... 281 2
South Dakota................................. Perkins........................ 151 1
South Dakota................................. Potter......................... 354 2
South Dakota................................. Roberts........................ 560 3
South Dakota................................. Sanborn........................ 390 2
South Dakota................................. Shannon........................ 134 1
[[Page 65109]]
South Dakota................................. Spink.......................... 451 2
South Dakota................................. Stanley........................ 166 1
South Dakota................................. Sully.......................... 386 2
South Dakota................................. Todd........................... 166 1
South Dakota................................. Tripp.......................... 270 2
South Dakota................................. Turner......................... 1,033 4
South Dakota................................. Union.......................... 1,538 5
South Dakota................................. Walworth....................... 272 2
South Dakota................................. Yankton........................ 839 3
South Dakota................................. Ziebach........................ 138 1
Tennessee.................................... Anderson....................... 3,226 7
Tennessee.................................... Bedford........................ 1,995 5
Tennessee.................................... Benton......................... 1,264 4
Tennessee.................................... Bledsoe........................ 1,739 5
Tennessee.................................... Blount......................... 4,243 7
Tennessee.................................... Bradley........................ 3,043 7
Tennessee.................................... Campbell....................... 1,576 5
Tennessee.................................... Cannon......................... 2,214 6
Tennessee.................................... Carroll........................ 1,340 4
Tennessee.................................... Carter......................... 2,426 6
Tennessee.................................... Cheatham....................... 2,487 6
Tennessee.................................... Chester........................ 1,315 4
Tennessee.................................... Claiborne...................... 1,472 4
Tennessee.................................... Clay........................... 1,212 4
Tennessee.................................... Cocke.......................... 2,247 6
Tennessee.................................... Coffee......................... 2,065 6
Tennessee.................................... Crockett....................... 1,638 5
Tennessee.................................... Cumberland..................... 2,056 6
Tennessee.................................... Davidson....................... 5,247 8
Tennessee.................................... Decatur........................ 1,061 4
Tennessee.................................... DeKalb......................... 2,035 6
Tennessee.................................... Dickson........................ 2,090 6
Tennessee.................................... Dyer........................... 1,517 5
Tennessee.................................... Fayette........................ 1,625 5
Tennessee.................................... Fentress....................... 1,802 5
Tennessee.................................... Franklin....................... 2,145 6
Tennessee.................................... Gibson......................... 1,275 4
Tennessee.................................... Giles.......................... 1,674 5
Tennessee.................................... Grainger....................... 1,651 5
Tennessee.................................... Greene......................... 2,353 6
Tennessee.................................... Grundy......................... 1,709 5
Tennessee.................................... Hamblen........................ 3,082 7
Tennessee.................................... Hamilton....................... 2,459 6
Tennessee.................................... Hancock........................ 1,563 5
Tennessee.................................... Hardeman....................... 989 3
Tennessee.................................... Hardin......................... 1,181 4
Tennessee.................................... Hawkins........................ 2,173 6
Tennessee.................................... Haywood........................ 1,297 4
Tennessee.................................... Henderson...................... 1,115 4
Tennessee.................................... Henry.......................... 1,229 4
Tennessee.................................... Hickman........................ 1,215 4
Tennessee.................................... Houston........................ 1,166 4
Tennessee.................................... Humphreys...................... 1,279 4
Tennessee.................................... Jackson........................ 1,385 4
Tennessee.................................... Jefferson...................... 3,082 7
Tennessee.................................... Johnson........................ 2,995 6
Tennessee.................................... Knox........................... 4,136 7
Tennessee.................................... Lake........................... 1,207 4
Tennessee.................................... Lauderdale..................... 1,136 4
Tennessee.................................... Lawrence....................... 1,446 4
Tennessee.................................... Lewis.......................... 1,525 5
Tennessee.................................... Lincoln........................ 1,619 5
Tennessee.................................... Loudon......................... 3,150 7
Tennessee.................................... Macon.......................... 2,118 6
Tennessee.................................... Madison........................ 2,024 6
Tennessee.................................... Marion......................... 1,607 5
Tennessee.................................... Marshall....................... 1,804 5
Tennessee.................................... Maury.......................... 2,063 6
Tennessee.................................... McMinn......................... 2,251 6
Tennessee.................................... McNairy........................ 849 3
Tennessee.................................... Meigs.......................... 2,250 6
[[Page 65110]]
Tennessee.................................... Monroe......................... 2,341 6
Tennessee.................................... Montgomery..................... 1,930 5
Tennessee.................................... Moore.......................... 1,673 5
Tennessee.................................... Morgan......................... 1,858 5
Tennessee.................................... Obion.......................... 1,333 4
Tennessee.................................... Overton........................ 1,984 5
Tennessee.................................... Perry.......................... 1,187 4
Tennessee.................................... Pickett........................ 1,891 5
Tennessee.................................... Polk........................... 3,309 7
Tennessee.................................... Putnam......................... 2,383 6
Tennessee.................................... Rhea........................... 2,164 6
Tennessee.................................... Roane.......................... 2,854 6
Tennessee.................................... Robertson...................... 2,038 6
Tennessee.................................... Rutherford..................... 2,367 6
Tennessee.................................... Scott.......................... 1,619 5
Tennessee.................................... Sequatchie..................... 1,810 5
Tennessee.................................... Sevier......................... 3,016 7
Tennessee.................................... Shelby......................... 3,057 7
Tennessee.................................... Smith.......................... 1,668 5
Tennessee.................................... Stewart........................ 1,655 5
Tennessee.................................... Sullivan....................... 2,788 6
Tennessee.................................... Sumner......................... 2,637 6
Tennessee.................................... Tipton......................... 1,558 5
Tennessee.................................... Trousdale...................... 2,103 6
Tennessee.................................... Unicoi......................... 5,030 8
Tennessee.................................... Union.......................... 2,150 6
Tennessee.................................... Van Buren...................... 1,586 5
Tennessee.................................... Warren......................... 1,958 5
Tennessee.................................... Washington..................... 3,245 7
Tennessee.................................... Wayne.......................... 1,030 4
Tennessee.................................... Weakley........................ 1,219 4
Tennessee.................................... White.......................... 2,006 6
Tennessee.................................... Williamson..................... 4,133 7
Tennessee.................................... Wilson......................... 2,646 6
Texas........................................ Anderson....................... 830 3
Texas........................................ Andrews........................ 131 1
Texas........................................ Angelina....................... 1,856 5
Texas........................................ Aransas........................ 806 3
Texas........................................ Archer......................... 423 2
Texas........................................ Armstrong...................... 299 2
Texas........................................ Atascosa....................... 760 3
Texas........................................ Austin......................... 1,741 5
Texas........................................ Bailey......................... 352 2
Texas........................................ Bandera........................ 1,390 4
Texas........................................ Bastrop........................ 1,487 4
Texas........................................ Baylor......................... 414 2
Texas........................................ Bee............................ 661 3
Texas........................................ Bell........................... 1,034 4
Texas........................................ Bexar.......................... 1,600 5
Texas........................................ Blanco......................... 1,953 5
Texas........................................ Borden......................... 278 2
Texas........................................ Bosque......................... 1,182 4
Texas........................................ Bowie.......................... 1,301 4
Texas........................................ Brazoria....................... 1,213 4
Texas........................................ Brazos......................... 1,370 4
Texas........................................ Brewster....................... 92 1
Texas........................................ Briscoe........................ 219 1
Texas........................................ Brooks......................... 461 2
Texas........................................ Brown.......................... 718 3
Texas........................................ Burleson....................... 1,122 4
Texas........................................ Burnet......................... 1,452 4
Texas........................................ Caldwell....................... 1,341 4
Texas........................................ Calhoun........................ 694 3
Texas........................................ Callahan....................... 474 2
Texas........................................ Cameron........................ 1,239 4
Texas........................................ Camp........................... 1,512 5
Texas........................................ Carson......................... 355 2
Texas........................................ Cass........................... 1,003 4
Texas........................................ Castro......................... 532 3
Texas........................................ Chambers....................... 725 3
Texas........................................ Cherokee....................... 1,086 4
[[Page 65111]]
Texas........................................ Childress...................... 258 2
Texas........................................ Clay........................... 509 3
Texas........................................ Cochran........................ 295 2
Texas........................................ Coke........................... 418 2
Texas........................................ Coleman........................ 490 2
Texas........................................ Collin......................... 2,027 6
Texas........................................ Collingsworth.................. 365 2
Texas........................................ Colorado....................... 1,210 4
Texas........................................ Comal.......................... 1,682 5
Texas........................................ Comanche....................... 782 3
Texas........................................ Concho......................... 411 2
Texas........................................ Cooke.......................... 1,130 4
Texas........................................ Coryell........................ 850 3
Texas........................................ Cottle......................... 187 1
Texas........................................ Crane.......................... 90 1
Texas........................................ Crockett....................... 162 1
Texas........................................ Crosby......................... 373 2
Texas........................................ Culberson...................... 66 1
Texas........................................ Dallam......................... 481 2
Texas........................................ Dallas......................... 2,375 6
Texas........................................ Dawson......................... 425 2
Texas........................................ Deaf Smith..................... 352 2
Texas........................................ Delta.......................... 754 3
Texas........................................ Denton......................... 2,318 6
Texas........................................ DeWitt......................... 959 3
Texas........................................ Dickens........................ 229 1
Texas........................................ Dimmit......................... 394 2
Texas........................................ Donley......................... 288 2
Texas........................................ Duval.......................... 580 3
Texas........................................ Eastland....................... 583 3
Texas........................................ Ector.......................... 113 1
Texas........................................ Edwards........................ 334 2
Texas........................................ El Paso........................ 1,750 5
Texas........................................ Ellis.......................... 1,270 4
Texas........................................ Erath.......................... 1,066 4
Texas........................................ Falls.......................... 694 3
Texas........................................ Fannin......................... 920 3
Texas........................................ Fayette........................ 1,503 5
Texas........................................ Fisher......................... 342 2
Texas........................................ Floyd.......................... 387 2
Texas........................................ Foard.......................... 274 2
Texas........................................ Fort Bend...................... 1,541 5
Texas........................................ Franklin....................... 982 3
Texas........................................ Freestone...................... 720 3
Texas........................................ Frio........................... 626 3
Texas........................................ Gaines......................... 482 2
Texas........................................ Galveston...................... 1,261 4
Texas........................................ Garza.......................... 213 1
Texas........................................ Gillespie...................... 1,595 5
Texas........................................ Glasscock...................... 282 2
Texas........................................ Goliad......................... 726 3
Texas........................................ Gonzales....................... 939 3
Texas........................................ Gray........................... 342 2
Texas........................................ Grayson........................ 1,537 5
Texas........................................ Gregg.......................... 1,163 4
Texas........................................ Grimes......................... 1,438 4
Texas........................................ Guadalupe...................... 1,617 5
Texas........................................ Hale........................... 473 2
Texas........................................ Hall........................... 231 1
Texas........................................ Hamilton....................... 720 3
Texas........................................ Hansford....................... 295 2
Texas........................................ Hardeman....................... 279 2
Texas........................................ Hardin......................... 1,008 4
Texas........................................ Harris......................... 2,098 6
Texas........................................ Harrison....................... 959 3
Texas........................................ Hartley........................ 301 2
Texas........................................ Haskell........................ 338 2
Texas........................................ Hays........................... 2,302 6
Texas........................................ Hemphill....................... 213 1
Texas........................................ Henderson...................... 1,309 4
Texas........................................ Hidalgo........................ 1,612 5
[[Page 65112]]
Texas........................................ Hill........................... 958 3
Texas........................................ Hockley........................ 390 2
Texas........................................ Hood........................... 1,857 5
Texas........................................ Hopkins........................ 1,124 4
Texas........................................ Houston........................ 864 3
Texas........................................ Howard......................... 355 2
Texas........................................ Hudspeth....................... 121 1
Texas........................................ Hunt........................... 1,268 4
Texas........................................ Hutchinson..................... 202 1
Texas........................................ Irion.......................... 187 1
Texas........................................ Jack........................... 570 3
Texas........................................ Jackson........................ 871 3
Texas........................................ Jasper......................... 1,229 4
Texas........................................ Jeff Davis..................... 105 1
Texas........................................ Jefferson...................... 688 3
Texas........................................ Jim Hogg....................... 358 2
Texas........................................ Jim Wells...................... 500 2
Texas........................................ Johnson........................ 1,748 5
Texas........................................ Jones.......................... 416 2
Texas........................................ Karnes......................... 654 3
Texas........................................ Kaufman........................ 1,245 4
Texas........................................ Kendall........................ 1,734 5
Texas........................................ Kenedy......................... 282 2
Texas........................................ Kent........................... 166 1
Texas........................................ Kerr........................... 907 3
Texas........................................ Kimble......................... 521 3
Texas........................................ King........................... 170 1
Texas........................................ Kinney......................... 318 2
Texas........................................ Kleberg........................ 478 2
Texas........................................ Knox........................... 238 1
Texas........................................ La Salle....................... 474 2
Texas........................................ Lamar.......................... 704 3
Texas........................................ Lamb........................... 418 2
Texas........................................ Lampasas....................... 972 3
Texas........................................ Lavaca......................... 1,024 4
Texas........................................ Lee............................ 1,156 4
Texas........................................ Leon........................... 854 3
Texas........................................ Liberty........................ 1,205 4
Texas........................................ Limestone...................... 594 3
Texas........................................ Lipscomb....................... 294 2
Texas........................................ Live Oak....................... 568 3
Texas........................................ Llano.......................... 1,141 4
Texas........................................ Loving......................... 64 1
Texas........................................ Lubbock........................ 649 3
Texas........................................ Lynn........................... 377 2
Texas........................................ Madison........................ 910 3
Texas........................................ Marion......................... 781 3
Texas........................................ Martin......................... 347 2
Texas........................................ Mason.......................... 777 3
Texas........................................ Matagorda...................... 811 3
Texas........................................ Maverick....................... 234 1
Texas........................................ McCulloch...................... 579 3
Texas........................................ McLennan....................... 998 3
Texas........................................ McMullen....................... 566 3
Texas........................................ Medina......................... 902 3
Texas........................................ Menard......................... 395 2
Texas........................................ Midland........................ 307 2
Texas........................................ Milam.......................... 949 3
Texas........................................ Mills.......................... 778 3
Texas........................................ Mitchell....................... 273 2
Texas........................................ Montague....................... 1,008 4
Texas........................................ Montgomery..................... 2,247 6
Texas........................................ Moore.......................... 459 2
Texas........................................ Morris......................... 666 3
Texas........................................ Motley......................... 214 1
Texas........................................ Nacogdoches.................... 1,094 4
Texas........................................ Navarro........................ 694 3
Texas........................................ Newton......................... 766 3
Texas........................................ Nolan.......................... 380 2
Texas........................................ Nueces......................... 757 3
Texas........................................ Ochiltree...................... 346 2
[[Page 65113]]
Texas........................................ Oldham......................... 170 1
Texas........................................ Orange......................... 1,363 4
Texas........................................ Palo Pinto..................... 640 3
Texas........................................ Panola......................... 806 3
Texas........................................ Parker......................... 1,830 5
Texas........................................ Parmer......................... 479 2
Texas........................................ Pecos.......................... 111 1
Texas........................................ Polk........................... 1,087 4
Texas........................................ Potter......................... 297 2
Texas........................................ Presidio....................... 259 2
Texas........................................ Rains.......................... 1,252 4
Texas........................................ Randall........................ 444 2
Texas........................................ Reagan......................... 163 1
Texas........................................ Real........................... 492 2
Texas........................................ Red River...................... 703 3
Texas........................................ Reeves......................... 111 1
Texas........................................ Refugio........................ 344 2
Texas........................................ Roberts........................ 174 1
Texas........................................ Robertson...................... 851 3
Texas........................................ Rockwall....................... 2,503 6
Texas........................................ Runnels........................ 478 2
Texas........................................ Rusk........................... 1,030 4
Texas........................................ Sabine......................... 1,525 5
Texas........................................ San Augustine.................. 1,061 4
Texas........................................ San Jacinto.................... 1,694 5
Texas........................................ San Patricio................... 710 3
Texas........................................ San Saba....................... 614 3
Texas........................................ Schleicher..................... 271 2
Texas........................................ Scurry......................... 304 2
Texas........................................ Shackelford.................... 350 2
Texas........................................ Shelby......................... 1,484 4
Texas........................................ Sherman........................ 448 2
Texas........................................ Smith.......................... 1,253 4
Texas........................................ Somervell...................... 1,385 4
Texas........................................ Starr.......................... 530 3
Texas........................................ Stephens....................... 384 2
Texas........................................ Sterling....................... 160 1
Texas........................................ Stonewall...................... 234 1
Texas........................................ Sutton......................... 290 2
Texas........................................ Swisher........................ 368 2
Texas........................................ Tarrant........................ 2,409 6
Texas........................................ Taylor......................... 529 3
Texas........................................ Terrell........................ 86 1
Texas........................................ Terry.......................... 488 2
Texas........................................ Throckmorton................... 291 2
Texas........................................ Titus.......................... 1,269 4
Texas........................................ Tom Green...................... 502 3
Texas........................................ Travis......................... 1,441 4
Texas........................................ Trinity........................ 998 3
Texas........................................ Tyler.......................... 1,561 5
Texas........................................ Upshur......................... 1,245 4
Texas........................................ Upton.......................... 110 1
Texas........................................ Uvalde......................... 516 3
Texas........................................ Val Verde...................... 169 1
Texas........................................ Van Zandt...................... 1,292 4
Texas........................................ Victoria....................... 718 3
Texas........................................ Walker......................... 1,962 5
Texas........................................ Waller......................... 2,244 6
Texas........................................ Ward........................... 110 1
Texas........................................ Washington..................... 1,967 5
Texas........................................ Webb........................... 357 2
Texas........................................ Wharton........................ 931 3
Texas........................................ Wheeler........................ 312 2
Texas........................................ Wichita........................ 522 3
Texas........................................ Wilbarger...................... 274 2
Texas........................................ Willacy........................ 853 3
Texas........................................ Williamson..................... 1,876 5
Texas........................................ Wilson......................... 1,052 4
Texas........................................ Winkler........................ 82 1
Texas........................................ Wise........................... 1,508 5
Texas........................................ Wood........................... 1,198 4
[[Page 65114]]
Texas........................................ Yoakum......................... 463 2
Texas........................................ Young.......................... 455 2
Texas........................................ Zapata......................... 532 3
Texas........................................ Zavala......................... 522 3
Utah......................................... Beaver......................... 1,595 5
Utah......................................... Box Elder...................... 422 2
Utah......................................... Cache.......................... 1,502 5
Utah......................................... Carbon......................... 351 2
Utah......................................... Daggett........................ 560 3
Utah......................................... Davis.......................... 3,042 7
Utah......................................... Duchesne....................... 295 2
Utah......................................... Emery.......................... 689 3
Utah......................................... Garfield....................... 1,073 4
Utah......................................... Grand.......................... 846 3
Utah......................................... Iron........................... 646 3
Utah......................................... Juab........................... 455 2
Utah......................................... Kane........................... 465 2
Utah......................................... Millard........................ 651 3
Utah......................................... Morgan......................... 848 3
Utah......................................... Piute.......................... 1,065 4
Utah......................................... Rich........................... 252 2
Utah......................................... Salt Lake...................... 3,794 7
Utah......................................... San Juan....................... 217 1
Utah......................................... Sanpete........................ 976 3
Utah......................................... Sevier......................... 1,064 4
Utah......................................... Summit......................... 1,000 3
Utah......................................... Tooele......................... 382 2
Utah......................................... Uintah......................... 186 1
Utah......................................... Utah........................... 2,228 6
Utah......................................... Wasatch........................ 2,349 6
Utah......................................... Washington..................... 1,327 4
Utah......................................... Wayne.......................... 1,342 4
Utah......................................... Weber.......................... 4,618 7
Vermont...................................... Addison........................ 1,436 4
Vermont...................................... Bennington..................... 1,374 4
Vermont...................................... Caledonia...................... 1,610 5
Vermont...................................... Chittenden..................... 1,973 5
Vermont...................................... Essex.......................... 1,134 4
Vermont...................................... Franklin....................... 1,217 4
Vermont...................................... Grand Isle..................... 2,546 6
Vermont...................................... Lamoille....................... 1,636 5
Vermont...................................... Orange......................... 1,470 4
Vermont...................................... Orleans........................ 1,229 4
Vermont...................................... Rutland........................ 2,106 6
Vermont...................................... Washington..................... 1,907 5
Vermont...................................... Windham........................ 1,954 5
Vermont...................................... Windsor........................ 2,835 6
Virginia..................................... Accomack....................... 1,570 5
Virginia..................................... Albemarle...................... 3,557 7
Virginia..................................... Alleghany...................... 1,758 5
Virginia..................................... Amelia......................... 1,796 5
Virginia..................................... Amherst........................ 1,922 5
Virginia..................................... Appomattox..................... 1,226 4
Virginia..................................... Arlington...................... 2,140 6
Virginia..................................... Augusta........................ 2,367 6
Virginia..................................... Bath........................... 1,692 5
Virginia..................................... Bedford........................ 2,336 6
Virginia..................................... Bland.......................... 1,162 4
Virginia..................................... Botetourt...................... 2,186 6
Virginia..................................... Brunswick...................... 1,097 4
Virginia..................................... Buchanan....................... 2,140 6
Virginia..................................... Buckingham..................... 1,524 5
Virginia..................................... Campbell....................... 1,499 4
Virginia..................................... Caroline....................... 1,829 5
Virginia..................................... Carroll........................ 2,070 6
Virginia..................................... Charles City................... 2,151 6
Virginia..................................... Charlotte...................... 1,058 4
Virginia..................................... Chesapeake City................ 2,800 6
Virginia..................................... Chesterfield................... 4,206 7
Virginia..................................... Clarke......................... 3,825 7
Virginia..................................... Craig.......................... 1,522 5
[[Page 65115]]
Virginia..................................... Culpeper....................... 3,330 7
Virginia..................................... Cumberland..................... 1,774 5
Virginia..................................... Dickenson...................... 1,245 4
Virginia..................................... Dinwiddie...................... 1,308 4
Virginia..................................... Essex.......................... 1,529 5
Virginia..................................... Fairfax........................ 6,689 8
Virginia..................................... Fauquier....................... 4,800 7
Virginia..................................... Floyd.......................... 1,690 5
Virginia..................................... Fluvanna....................... 1,859 5
Virginia..................................... Franklin....................... 1,746 5
Virginia..................................... Frederick...................... 2,941 6
Virginia..................................... Giles.......................... 1,670 5
Virginia..................................... Gloucester..................... 2,637 6
Virginia..................................... Goochland...................... 2,401 6
Virginia..................................... Grayson........................ 2,094 6
Virginia..................................... Greene......................... 3,100 7
Virginia..................................... Greensville.................... 1,119 4
Virginia..................................... Halifax........................ 1,270 4
Virginia..................................... Hanover........................ 3,050 7
Virginia..................................... Henrico........................ 3,217 7
Virginia..................................... Henry.......................... 1,266 4
Virginia..................................... Highland....................... 1,838 5
Virginia..................................... Isle of Wight.................. 1,510 5
Virginia..................................... James City..................... 4,134 7
Virginia..................................... King and Queen................. 1,586 5
Virginia..................................... King George.................... 2,294 6
Virginia..................................... King William................... 1,614 5
Virginia..................................... Lancaster...................... 1,994 5
Virginia..................................... Lee............................ 1,381 4
Virginia..................................... Loudoun........................ 8,646 8
Virginia..................................... Louisa......................... 1,898 5
Virginia..................................... Lunenburg...................... 1,066 4
Virginia..................................... Madison........................ 2,478 6
Virginia..................................... Mathews........................ 2,153 6
Virginia..................................... Mecklenburg.................... 1,266 4
Virginia..................................... Middlesex...................... 2,181 6
Virginia..................................... Montgomery..................... 2,505 6
Virginia..................................... Nelson......................... 1,682 5
Virginia..................................... New Kent....................... 2,262 6
Virginia..................................... Northampton.................... 1,915 5
Virginia..................................... Northumberland................. 1,538 5
Virginia..................................... Nottoway....................... 1,688 5
Virginia..................................... Orange......................... 2,510 6
Virginia..................................... Page........................... 3,132 7
Virginia..................................... Patrick........................ 1,316 4
Virginia..................................... Pittsylvania................... 1,266 4
Virginia..................................... Powhatan....................... 2,422 6
Virginia..................................... Prince Edward.................. 1,374 4
Virginia..................................... Prince George.................. 1,571 5
Virginia..................................... Prince William................. 5,283 8
Virginia..................................... Pulaski........................ 1,795 5
Virginia..................................... Rappahannock................... 2,952 6
Virginia..................................... Richmond....................... 1,390 4
Virginia..................................... Roanoke........................ 2,669 6
Virginia..................................... Rockbridge..................... 2,299 6
Virginia..................................... Rockingham..................... 3,234 7
Virginia..................................... Russell........................ 1,282 4
Virginia..................................... Scott.......................... 1,250 4
Virginia..................................... Shenandoah..................... 2,624 6
Virginia..................................... Smyth.......................... 1,252 4
Virginia..................................... Southampton.................... 1,575 5
Virginia..................................... Spotsylvania................... 3,430 7
Virginia..................................... Stafford....................... 3,904 7
Virginia..................................... Suffolk........................ 1,871 5
Virginia..................................... Surry.......................... 1,524 5
Virginia..................................... Sussex......................... 1,243 4
Virginia..................................... Tazewell....................... 1,249 4
Virginia..................................... Virginia Beach City............ 2,916 6
Virginia..................................... Warren......................... 3,062 7
Virginia..................................... Washington..................... 1,942 5
Virginia..................................... Westmoreland................... 1,613 5
[[Page 65116]]
Virginia..................................... Wise........................... 1,893 5
Virginia..................................... Wythe.......................... 1,726 5
Virginia..................................... York........................... 39,100 11
Washington................................... Adams.......................... 596 3
Washington................................... Asotin......................... 408 2
Washington................................... Benton......................... 1,361 4
Washington................................... Chelan......................... 5,250 8
Washington................................... Clallam........................ 8,840 8
Washington................................... Clark.......................... 8,009 8
Washington................................... Columbia....................... 566 3
Washington................................... Cowlitz........................ 4,094 7
Washington................................... Douglas........................ 644 3
Washington................................... Ferry.......................... 314 2
Washington................................... Franklin....................... 1,158 4
Washington................................... Garfield....................... 423 2
Washington................................... Grant.......................... 1,538 5
Washington................................... Grays Harbor................... 1,854 5
Washington................................... Island......................... 7,574 8
Washington................................... Jefferson...................... 4,353 7
Washington................................... King........................... 17,070 9
Washington................................... Kitsap......................... 10,295 9
Washington................................... Kittitas....................... 2,162 6
Washington................................... Klickitat...................... 726 3
Washington................................... Lewis.......................... 2,418 6
Washington................................... Lincoln........................ 485 2
Washington................................... Mason.......................... 3,966 7
Washington................................... Okanogan....................... 674 3
Washington................................... Pacific........................ 1,661 5
Washington................................... Pend Oreille................... 1,467 4
Washington................................... Pierce......................... 7,724 8
Washington................................... San Juan....................... 5,046 8
Washington................................... Skagit......................... 4,090 7
Washington................................... Skamania....................... 3,653 7
Washington................................... Snohomish...................... 7,723 8
Washington................................... Spokane........................ 1,691 5
Washington................................... Stevens........................ 936 3
Washington................................... Thurston....................... 6,766 8
Washington................................... Wahkiakum...................... 2,152 6
Washington................................... Walla Walla.................... 1,064 4
Washington................................... Whatcom........................ 4,767 7
Washington................................... Whitman........................ 687 3
Washington................................... Yakima......................... 1,017 4
West Virginia................................ Barbour........................ 818 3
West Virginia................................ Berkeley....................... 2,578 6
West Virginia................................ Boone.......................... 866 3
West Virginia................................ Braxton........................ 677 3
West Virginia................................ Brooke......................... 965 3
West Virginia................................ Cabell......................... 1,056 4
West Virginia................................ Calhoun........................ 582 3
West Virginia................................ Clay........................... 883 3
West Virginia................................ Doddridge...................... 664 3
West Virginia................................ Fayette........................ 1,054 4
West Virginia................................ Gilmer......................... 634 3
West Virginia................................ Grant.......................... 1,310 4
West Virginia................................ Greenbrier..................... 1,192 4
West Virginia................................ Hampshire...................... 1,299 4
West Virginia................................ Hancock........................ 1,898 5
West Virginia................................ Hardy.......................... 1,379 4
West Virginia................................ Harrison....................... 998 3
West Virginia................................ Jackson........................ 1,011 4
West Virginia................................ Jefferson...................... 2,370 6
West Virginia................................ Kanawha........................ 1,129 4
West Virginia................................ Lewis.......................... 855 3
West Virginia................................ Lincoln........................ 878 3
West Virginia................................ Logan.......................... 1,533 5
West Virginia................................ Marion......................... 1,170 4
West Virginia................................ Marshall....................... 760 3
West Virginia................................ Mason.......................... 1,021 4
West Virginia................................ McDowell....................... 721 3
West Virginia................................ Mercer......................... 1,131 4
West Virginia................................ Mineral........................ 1,042 4
[[Page 65117]]
West Virginia................................ Mingo.......................... 662 3
West Virginia................................ Monongalia..................... 1,101 4
West Virginia................................ Monroe......................... 1,086 4
West Virginia................................ Morgan......................... 1,859 5
West Virginia................................ Nicholas....................... 1,157 4
West Virginia................................ Ohio........................... 978 3
West Virginia................................ Pendleton...................... 934 3
West Virginia................................ Pleasants...................... 846 3
West Virginia................................ Pocahontas..................... 895 3
West Virginia................................ Preston........................ 1,132 4
West Virginia................................ Putnam......................... 1,411 4
West Virginia................................ Raleigh........................ 1,097 4
West Virginia................................ Randolph....................... 826 3
West Virginia................................ Ritchie........................ 725 3
West Virginia................................ Roane.......................... 677 3
West Virginia................................ Summers........................ 950 3
West Virginia................................ Taylor......................... 1,094 4
West Virginia................................ Tucker......................... 791 3
West Virginia................................ Tyler.......................... 744 3
West Virginia................................ Upshur......................... 838 3
West Virginia................................ Wayne.......................... 838 3
West Virginia................................ Webster........................ 879 3
West Virginia................................ Wetzel......................... 646 3
West Virginia................................ Wirt........................... 931 3
West Virginia................................ Wood........................... 1,008 4
West Virginia................................ Wyoming........................ 955 3
Wisconsin.................................... Adams.......................... 1,704 5
Wisconsin.................................... Ashland........................ 903 3
Wisconsin.................................... Barron......................... 1,303 4
Wisconsin.................................... Bayfield....................... 849 3
Wisconsin.................................... Brown.......................... 2,354 6
Wisconsin.................................... Buffalo........................ 1,201 4
Wisconsin.................................... Burnett........................ 1,478 4
Wisconsin.................................... Calumet........................ 2,199 6
Wisconsin.................................... Chippewa....................... 1,222 4
Wisconsin.................................... Clark.......................... 1,194 4
Wisconsin.................................... Columbia....................... 2,020 6
Wisconsin.................................... Crawford....................... 1,390 4
Wisconsin.................................... Dane........................... 2,611 6
Wisconsin.................................... Dodge.......................... 1,968 5
Wisconsin.................................... Door........................... 1,706 5
Wisconsin.................................... Douglas........................ 1,001 3
Wisconsin.................................... Dunn........................... 1,470 4
Wisconsin.................................... Eau Claire..................... 1,426 4
Wisconsin.................................... Florence....................... 1,012 4
Wisconsin.................................... Fond du Lac.................... 1,881 5
Wisconsin.................................... Forest......................... 1,136 4
Wisconsin.................................... Grant.......................... 1,540 5
Wisconsin.................................... Green.......................... 1,817 5
Wisconsin.................................... Green Lake..................... 1,585 5
Wisconsin.................................... Iowa........................... 1,794 5
Wisconsin.................................... Iron........................... 870 3
Wisconsin.................................... Jackson........................ 1,282 4
Wisconsin.................................... Jefferson...................... 2,470 6
Wisconsin.................................... Juneau......................... 1,496 4
Wisconsin.................................... Kenosha........................ 3,610 7
Wisconsin.................................... Kewaunee....................... 2,018 6
Wisconsin.................................... La Crosse...................... 1,550 5
Wisconsin.................................... Lafayette...................... 1,690 5
Wisconsin.................................... Langlade....................... 1,374 4
Wisconsin.................................... Lincoln........................ 1,253 4
Wisconsin.................................... Manitowoc...................... 2,246 6
Wisconsin.................................... Marathon....................... 1,477 4
Wisconsin.................................... Marinette...................... 1,364 4
Wisconsin.................................... Marquette...................... 1,711 5
Wisconsin.................................... Menominee...................... 572 3
Wisconsin.................................... Milwaukee...................... 5,134 8
Wisconsin.................................... Monroe......................... 1,528 5
Wisconsin.................................... Oconto......................... 1,609 5
Wisconsin.................................... Oneida......................... 1,654 5
Wisconsin.................................... Outagamie...................... 2,533 6
[[Page 65118]]
Wisconsin.................................... Ozaukee........................ 3,234 7
Wisconsin.................................... Pepin.......................... 1,478 4
Wisconsin.................................... Pierce......................... 1,856 5
Wisconsin.................................... Polk........................... 1,720 5
Wisconsin.................................... Portage........................ 2,408 6
Wisconsin.................................... Price.......................... 1,134 4
Wisconsin.................................... Racine......................... 3,420 7
Wisconsin.................................... Richland....................... 1,746 5
Wisconsin.................................... Rock........................... 2,762 6
Wisconsin.................................... Rusk........................... 1,534 5
Wisconsin.................................... Sauk........................... 2,170 6
Wisconsin.................................... Sawyer......................... 1,589 5
Wisconsin.................................... Shawano........................ 2,010 6
Wisconsin.................................... Sheboygan...................... 2,362 6
Wisconsin.................................... St. Croix...................... 2,583 6
Wisconsin.................................... Taylor......................... 1,072 4
Wisconsin.................................... Trempealeau.................... 1,435 4
Wisconsin.................................... Vernon......................... 1,414 4
Wisconsin.................................... Vilas.......................... 2,525 6
Wisconsin.................................... Walworth....................... 3,127 7
Wisconsin.................................... Washburn....................... 1,393 4
Wisconsin.................................... Washington..................... 3,241 7
Wisconsin.................................... Waukesha....................... 3,788 7
Wisconsin.................................... Waupaca........................ 1,721 5
Wisconsin.................................... Waushara....................... 2,071 6
Wisconsin.................................... Winnebago...................... 2,015 6
Wisconsin.................................... Wood........................... 1,460 4
Wyoming...................................... Albany......................... 182 1
Wyoming...................................... Big Horn....................... 574 3
Wyoming...................................... Campbell....................... 142 1
Wyoming...................................... Carbon......................... 171 1
Wyoming...................................... Converse....................... 123 1
Wyoming...................................... Crook.......................... 288 2
Wyoming...................................... Fremont........................ 249 1
Wyoming...................................... Goshen......................... 330 2
Wyoming...................................... Hot Springs.................... 130 1
Wyoming...................................... Johnson........................ 216 1
Wyoming...................................... Laramie........................ 244 1
Wyoming...................................... Lincoln........................ 725 3
Wyoming...................................... Natrona........................ 150 1
Wyoming...................................... Niobrara....................... 210 1
Wyoming...................................... Park........................... 541 3
Wyoming...................................... Platte......................... 268 2
Wyoming...................................... Sheridan....................... 365 2
Wyoming...................................... Sublette....................... 586 3
Wyoming...................................... Sweetwater..................... 78 1
Wyoming...................................... Teton.......................... 2,446 6
Wyoming...................................... Uinta.......................... 298 2
Wyoming...................................... Washakie....................... 311 2
Wyoming...................................... Weston......................... 174 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* State-average Land and Building value used where no county-specific value is available.
[FR Doc. E8-25159 Filed 10-30-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-84-P