[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 13]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 17917-17918]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




 INTRODUCTION OF TARGET PRACTICE AND MARKSMANSHIP TRAINING SUPPORT ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. MARK UDALL

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 31, 2008

  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing a bill 
to facilitate the establishment of additional or expanded training 
ranges in certain States.
  The bill, entitled the ``Target Practice and Marksmanship Training 
Support Act,'' addresses a problem faced by many sportsmen and 
sportswomen and others in Colorado and some other States where 
population growth--and resulting public-safety concerns--has forced the 
Forest Service and other Federal land-managing agencies to bar target 
shooting on some parts of their lands where that activity was 
previously allowed.
  The result has been a serious reduction in the number of appropriate 
places for target shooting that are readily accessible, which 
unfortunately means that in some cases such shooting occurs in places 
that are not suitable for that purpose and where that activity can 
endanger public safety.
  My new bill would respond to this problem by revising the Federal Aid 
in Wildlife Restoration Act--often called the Pittman-Robertson Act--to 
give certain States temporary authority to use more of the Federal 
funds provided under that law for the establishment of new public 
target ranges or the enlargement or improvement of existing public 
target ranges. This authority would continue for ten fiscal years.
  It would also make some other changes to that same law in order to 
help qualifying States work toward that goal.
  The bill would apply to States where there has been at least a 2 
percent growth in population since the most recent decennial census and 
where there has been a reduction in the acreage of Federal lands open 
to use for target practice and marksmanship training.
  Also, to allay concerns by Federal land managers about potential 
liability related to allowing Federal land areas to be used for target 
practice and marksmanship training, the bill includes provisions to 
make clear that--(1) such a decision will be considered a discretionary 
function for purposes of the Federal Torts Claim Act; and (2) any 
potential liability of the United States for damages related to any 
activity at a public target range wholly or partially funded by the 
Federal government will be subject to the limits specified in the 
Federal Torts Claim Act.
  And, finally, the bill includes a section expressing the sense of 
Congress that the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management should 
cooperate with State and local authorities and other entities to carry 
out environmental remediation or other actions needed to allow target 
practice and marksmanship training to continue on lands managed by 
those Federal agencies.
  Madam Speaker, this bill will not increase Federal spending and it 
does not require any State to use any of the funds it receives under 
the Pittman-Robertson funds for any new purpose. But it would provide 
eligible States additional flexibility regarding the use of those funds 
if they decide to use more of those funds for establishment of new 
public target ranges or improvement or expansion of existing ranges. 
For the benefit of our colleagues, here is an outline of the bill's 
provisions:

    Outline of Target Practice and Marksmanship Training Support Act

  This proposed bill would address both the funding and liability 
issues to make it easier for State wildlife departments to work with 
Federal land agencies on establishing and improving safe and convenient 
target practice and marksmanship training facilities.


                    What the proposed bill would do

  Provides additional funding flexibility to states: The bill would 
amend the Pittman-Robertson Act to allow eligible States to increase 
the extent to which eligible States could use Federal funds they 
receive under that law to establish new, expanded, or improved shooting 
ranges (including acquisition of lands for that purpose).
  --Eligible States would be those that have experienced at least 2 
percent population growth since 2000 and have seen a reduction of the 
extent to which target practice and marksmanship training can take 
place on Federal lands within their borders.
  --Eligible States could apply for up to 90 percent of the cost of 
acquiring land for and/or construction of new, expanded, or improved 
facilities (current law caps Federal share at 75 percent) and could 
retain the funds until expended (current law requires funds unused in 
the year received to be refunded to the Federal government).
  --In addition, the bill would temporarily allow eligible States to 
use up to 10 percent of the Pittman-Robertson funds provided for 
wildlife management and conservation for acquiring land for and/or 
construction of new, expanded, or improved shooting ranges and to 
assist in cleanup or other steps needed to allow Federal lands to be 
used for target practice or marksmanship training. This provision would 
expire after 10 fiscal years.
  Addresses liability concerns: The bill makes it clear that shooting 
ranges on Federal lands do not expose the Federal land agency to 
liability for injuries that may occur at these facilities.
  Encourages Cooperation: The bill states sense of Congress that 
Federal land managers should cooperate with States, local government, 
and other entities in doing what's

[[Page 17918]]

needed to permit Federal lands to remain available for public target 
practice and marksmanship training.


                  What the proposed bill would NOT do

  Impose a mandate on States: The bill would provide an opportunity for 
eligible States to receive additional funds for specific purposes, but 
does not require any funds to be spent for those purposes.
  Raise any Taxes: The bill would broaden the uses for Pittman-
Robertson funds can be used, but does not increase the excise taxes 
from which such funds are derived.

                          ____________________