[House Report 113-649]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
113th Congress Rept. 113-649
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session Part 1
======================================================================
GUAM MILITARY TRAINING AND READINESS ACT OF 2014
_______
December 8, 2014.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hastings of Washington, from the Committee on Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 4402]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred
the bill (H.R. 4402) to authorize the Secretary of the Navy to
establish a surface danger zone over the Guam National Wildlife
Refuge or any portion thereof to support the operation of a
live-fire training range complex, having considered the same,
report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that
the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Guam Military Training and Readiness
Act of 2014''.
SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF SURFACE DANGER ZONE, RITIDIAN UNIT, GUAM
NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE.
(a) Agreement to Establish.--In order to accommodate the operation of
a live-fire training range complex on Andersen Air Force Base-Northwest
Field and the management of the adjacent Ritidian Unit of the Guam
National Wildlife Refuge, the Secretary of the Navy and the Secretary
of the Interior, notwithstanding the National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.), may enter into an
agreement providing for the establishment and operation of a surface
danger zone which overlays the Ritidian Unit or such portion thereof as
the Secretaries consider necessary.
(b) Elements of Agreement.--The agreement to establish a surface
danger zone over all or a portion of the Ritidian Unit of the Guam
National Wildlife Refuge shall include--
(1) measures to maintain the purposes of the Refuge; and
(2) as appropriate, measures, funded by the Secretary of the
Navy from funds appropriated after the date of enactment of
this Act and otherwise available to the Secretary, for the
following purposes:
(A) Relocation and reconstruction of structures and
facilities of the Refuge in existence as of the date of
the enactment of this Act.
(B) Mitigation of impacts to wildlife species present
on the Refuge or to be reintroduced in the future in
accordance with applicable laws.
(C) Use of Department of Defense personnel to
undertake conservation activities within the Ritidian
Unit normally performed by Department of the Interior
personnel, including habitat maintenance, maintaining
the boundary fence, and conducting the brown tree snake
eradication program.
(D) Openings and closures of the surface danger zone
to the public as may be necessary.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purpose of H.R. 4402 is to authorize the Secretary of
the Navy to establish a surface danger zone over the Guam
National Wildlife Refuge or any portion thereof to support the
operation of a live-fire training range complex.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
The United States and Japan have been negotiating moving
troops from Okinawa, Japan, to Guam since 1996 and over the
years have signed many agreements, the latest in 2012 referred
to as the ``2012 Roadmap Adjustments''. This agreement reduced
the number of troops relocating to Guam from 8,600 marines with
9,000 dependents to 5,000 marines with 1,300 dependents.
The Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Guam
and Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Military
Relocation, Relocating Marines from Okinawa, Visiting Aircraft
Carrier Berthing, and Army Air and Missile Defense Task Force
military relocation, was released to the public in July 2010.
The 2010 Record of Decision for the EIS included decisions on
the locations for the Marine Corps main cantonment, family
housing, and aviation and waterfront operations on Guam, and
training ranges on Tinian. However, the 2010 ROD deferred a
decision on the specific site for a Live-Fire Training Range
Complex (LFTRC).
The draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
(SEIS) for the LFTRC was released on April 18, 2014. Out of
five alternatives, the preferred alternative for the LFTRC is
option 5--the Northwest Field of Anderson Air Force base
adjacent to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Ritidian unit
of the Guam National Wildlife Refuge. It is the preferred
alternative in part because the LFTRC would be located solely
on military property, requiring no new land acquisition. It
also meets the draft SEIS requirements that the land area
should include space for the range facilities (firing points,
berms, and impact areas) and associated surface danger zones.
It would use 3,981 acres, of which 265 acres is for the active
firing ranges. The draft SEIS does note the preferred
alternative does not eliminate all operational or environmental
challenges. Public hearings were held on Guam on the draft SEIS
on May 17, 19 and 20, 2014. The public comment period is
scheduled to end on June 17, 2014.
A legal issue arose during the draft SEIS scoping process
for the Northwest Field, and the Navy proposed a noise study to
quantify sound impacts to the Ritidian unit of the Guam
National Wildlife Refuge. The FWS required the Navy to get a
special use permit. The permit was denied because the FWS
determined the refuge closure for the noise study was an
``inappropriate use''. The permit denial for the noise study
indicated the Navy's preferred alternative for the LFRTC was at
risk, since use of the surface danger zone would require refuge
closures.
Concerns with the placement of the LFTRC on in the
Northwest Field include its effect on species located in the
refuge and on the overlay refuge lands on military property.
The Guam National Wildlife Refuge (including the 22,456 acres
of overlay lands and the 1,317 acres of the Ritidian unit) was
created in 1993 to protect habitat for several endangered
species including the Mariana crow, Mariana fruit bat and the
Serianthes nelsonii tree and declining local bird populations.
The refuge has around 92,000 visitors annually who have access
to 120 acres of land and the waters adjacent to the Ritidian
unit, which include a heavily visited white sand beach, hiking
trails and some historic and cultural Chamorro sites. The
northern portion of this 120-acre section and the adjacent
waters would be closed when the machine gun range is in use.
The visitor center and associated buildings are located on
refuge lands that would fall within the larger surface danger
zone, and these facilities may need to be relocated or rebuilt
outside of the zone at a FWS estimated cost of $10-$12 million.
Lastly, research and predator controls for the brown tree snake
occurring on the refuge would be severely hampered by refuge
closures.
The Navy states the realignment of the 5,000 marines to
Guam is dependent on a LFTRC. The FWS ruling that the refuge
closures would be incompatible with the refuge places the
preferred location for the LFTRC at risk, thereby potentially
jeopardizing the relocation of Marines from Japan to Guam.
Delegate Bordallo supports the relocation of Marines to Guam
and introduced H.R. 4402 to authorize refuge closures as a
compatible use and allow for the development and use of the
LFTRC.
As introduced, H.R. 4402 would give the Secretary of the
Navy the authority to establish a surface danger zone over the
Guam National Wildlife Refuge to support training and
operations, including the live-fire training range complex on
the Northwest Field at Andersen Air Force Base. The bill would
make the establishment of the surface danger zone an authorized
use of the refuge. The bill would allow the Secretary of the
Navy to close portions of the refuge for public safety and
national security for limited periods and would require public
notification of the closures. Lastly, the bill states that
nothing in the bill would limit the authority of the Secretary
of the Interior to manage the refuge under section 4 of the
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 as
long as it is compatible with the authorities given to the
Secretary of the Navy in the bill.
During the Natural Resources Committee markup of the bill,
Delegate Madeleine Bordallo (D-GU) offered an amendment to
strike the underlying text of H.R. 4402 and replace it with
language to allow FWS and the Navy to enter into a cooperative
agreement to allow for the use of a surface danger zone over
the refuge and retain the missions of the refuge. The amendment
was adopted by unanimous consent.
COMMITTEE ACTION
H.R. 4402 was introduced on April 4, 2014, by Delegate
Madeleine Bordallo (D-GU). The bill was referred to the
Committee on Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the
Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans and Insular
Affairs. The bill was also referred to the Committee on Armed
Services. On April 29, 2014, the Subcommittee held a hearing on
the bill. On May 21, 2014, the Natural Resources Committee met
to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife,
Oceans and Insular Affairs was discharged by unanimous consent.
Delegate Bordallo offered an amendment in the nature of a
substitute to the bill; the amendment in the nature of a
substitute was adopted by unanimous consent. No further
amendments were offered, and the bill, as amended, was then
adopted and ordered favorably reported to the House of
Representatives by unanimous consent.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Natural Resources' oversight findings and
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII
1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the
Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and
a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be
incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(2)(B)
of that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when
the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted
cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974. Under clause 3(c)(3) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has
received the following cost estimate for this bill from the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office:
H.R. 4402--Guam Military Training and Readiness Act of 2014
H.R. 4402 would authorize the Department of Defense (DoD)
and the Department of the Interior to establish a danger zone
in the Guam National Wildlife Refuge for areas that would be
affected by rifle, pistol, and machine gun ranges that DoD
intends to construct adjacent to the refuge. The Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) has several facilities on the refuge
that are in close proximity to the range. For safety, DoD would
be required to move those facilities to a different part of the
refuge. Designation of the danger zone also would restrict
access to a portion of the refuge that is currently open to the
public when the machine gun range is in use.
On the basis of information from DoD and FWS, CBO estimates
that relocating the affected facilities would cost about $20
million, subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
However, DoD states that the FWS facilities would not have to
be relocated until 2022, when the machine gun range becomes
operational. Thus, enacting H.R. 4402 would not affect the
federal budget over the 2015-2019 period. Pay-as-you-go
procedures do not apply because enacting the bill would not
affect direct spending or revenues.
H.R. 4402 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and
would not affect the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is David Newman.
The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
2. Section 308(a) of Congressional Budget Act. As required
by clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives and section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget
Act of 1974, this bill does not contain any new budget
authority, spending authority, credit authority, or an increase
or decrease in revenues or tax expenditures. On the basis of
information from the Department of Defense and the Fish and
Wildlife Service, CBO estimates that relocating the affected
facilities would cost about $20 million, subject to the
availability of appropriated funds. However, DoD states that
the FWS facilities would not have to be relocated until 2022,
when the machine gun range becomes operational. Thus, enacting
H.R. 4402 would not affect the federal budget over the 2015-
2019 period.
3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or
objective of this bill is to authorize the Secretary of the
Navy to establish a surface danger zone over the Guam National
Wildlife Refuge or any portion thereof to support the operation
of a live-fire training range complex.
EARMARK STATEMENT
This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of
the House of Representatives.
COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
COMPLIANCE WITH H. RES. 5
Directed Rule Making. The Chairman does not believe that
this bill directs any executive branch official to conduct any
specific rule-making proceedings.
Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not
establish or reauthorize a program of the federal government
known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was
not included in any report from the Government Accountability
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139
or identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program
Information Act (Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law
98-169) as relating to other programs.
PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or
tribal law.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing
law.