PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 26, 2023
Salvaging American Lumber Via Action with Greater Efficiency Act or the SALVAGE Act
This bill provides for certain activities related to salvage operations and certain reforestation activities conducted on National Forest System lands or public lands.
The bill categorically excludes salvage operations carried out by the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of the Interior, on certain National Forest System lands or certain public lands, respectively, from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Each salvage operation covered by the categorical exclusion may not contain treatment units that exceed a total of 10,000 acres.
An environmental assessment for a salvage operation or reforestation activity proposed to be conducted on National Forest System lands or public lands that are adversely impacted by a large-scale catastrophic event shall be completed within 60 days after the conclusion of the event. In the case of such reforestation activities USDA and Interior shall, to the maximum extent practicable, achieve reforestation of at least 75% of the impacted lands during the five-year period following the conclusion of the catastrophic event.
No later than 60 days after a wildfire is contained on National Forest System lands, USDA shall convert any timber sales on lands impacted by such wildfire to salvage sales.
No restraining order, preliminary injunction, or injunction pending appeal shall be issued by any U.S. court respecting any decision to prepare or conduct a salvage operation or reforestation activity in response to a large-scale catastrophic event.
People & committees
Rep. Obernolte, Jay [R-CA-23] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Forestry.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 24, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.567 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.567 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.567 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.567 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.