Stewardship End Result Contracting Improvement Act
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 114-400.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 30, 2015
Stewardship End Result Contracting Improvement Act
Amends the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 to authorize the Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to obligate funds to cover any potential cancellation or termination costs (cancellation ceiling) in stages that are economically or programmatically viable with respect to an agreement or contract for a stewardship end result contracting project. Requires the Forest Service and BLM to submit written notice to Congress and the Office of Management and Budget 30 days before entering into a multiyear agreement or contract that includes a cancellation ceiling exceeding $25 million if proposed funding for the costs of cancelling the agreement or contract up to the ceiling is not included.
Allows the Forest Service and BLM, if the offset value of the forest products to be removed exceeds the value of the resource improvement treatments, to: (1) use the excess to satisfy any outstanding liabilities for cancelled agreements or contracts; or (2) if there are no such outstanding liabilities, apply the excess to other authorized stewardship projects.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 114-400.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.326 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.326 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.326 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.326 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.