[Senate Report 113-159]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 376
113th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 113-159
======================================================================
WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE AND FORT BLISS
_______
May 14, 2014.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Ms. Landrieu, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 753]
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was
referred the bill (S. 753) to provide for national security
benefits for White Sands Missile Range and Fort Bliss, having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an
amendment and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 3, strike lines 6 through 18 and insert the following:
(c) Revocation of Withdrawal; Management.--Effective on the date of
enactment of this Act--
(1) Public Land Order 833, dated May 21, 1952 (17 Fed. Reg.
4822), is revoked with respect to the approximately 2,050 acres
of land generally depicted as ``Parcel 2'' on the map; and
(2) the land described in paragraph (1) shall be managed by
the Secretary of the Interior as public land, in accordance
with--
(A) the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of
1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.); and
(B) any other applicable laws.
PURPOSE
The purpose of S. 753 is to withdraw and reserve for the
Secretary of the Army, for use for military purposes,
approximately 37,600 acres of public land adjacent to Fort
Bliss and approximately 5,100 acres of land adjacent to the
White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico.
BACKGROUND AND NEED
Prior to 1958, the President exercised broad power to
withdraw unlimited amounts of public land from the operation of
the public land, mining, and mineral leasing laws for military
purposes. Pursuant to this authority, Fort Bliss was
established as an Army post in southern New Mexico and western
Texas in the late 19th century, and the White Sands Missile
Range was established in southern New Mexico during World War
II.
The White Sands Missile Range and Fort Bliss are the two
largest military installations in the United States, together
occupying nearly 5,000 square miles. White Sands Missile Range
is the largest and covers almost 3,200 square miles in south
central New Mexico. Fort Bliss is the second largest and covers
almost 1,700 square miles in west Texas and southern New
Mexico, north of El Paso. The White Sands Missile Range was
originally established as the Alamogordo Bombing and Gunnery
Range in 1941. It was the site of Robert Goddard's early rocket
tests in 1942 and the Manhattan Project's Trinity test of the
first atomic bomb in 1945. It continues to be used for missile
testing. Fort Bliss currently houses the 1st Armed Division and
is used for heavy armor training.
In 1958, Congress enacted the Engle Act, Public Law 88-337,
in order to restrict the President's authority to withdraw
public land for military purposes and to reassert Congress'
authority to provide for the use of the public lands. See S.
Rept. 85-857 at 5-6 (1957). Section 2 of the Engle Act requires
an Act of Congress to withdraw more than 5,000 acres of public
land for military purposes. (43 U.S.C. 156).
The Dona Ana Range, which is part of Fort Bliss, is used
for tank gunnery and artillery training. Training activities on
the Dona Ana Range generate noise, vibration, and dust. The
Army is concerned that residential and commercial development
may occur on public land adjacent to the Range. Legislation is
needed to withdraw additional parcels, totaling 37,600 acres,
adjacent to the Dona Ana Range to ensure that incompatible
development does not occur and to establish a buffer zone for
live-fire training in the Dona Ana training area.
In addition, part of the White Sands Missile Range is used
by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's White
Sands Test Facility and Goddard Space Flight Center Tracking
and Data Relay Satellite Systems facility, and by the National
Reconnaissance Office's Aerospace Date Facility-Southwest.
These operations have special security and safety requirements,
but are located close to a public access area, and a number of
security incidents have occurred in the area. Legislation is
need to withdraw an additional parcel of 5,100 acres to provide
a one-mile stand-off area between these operations and the
public access area, to improve the security of the facilities.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
S. 753 was introduced by Senator Heinrich and cosponsored
by Senator Udall of New Mexico and Senator Cornyn, on April 17,
2013. The Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining
held a hearing on it on July 30, 2013 (S. Hrg. 113-85). The
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered it favorably
reported at its business meeting on November 14, 2013.
Similar legislation was included as section 205 of S. 1309,
the Military Land Withdrawals Act of 2013, which was also
ordered reported by the Committee on November 14, 2013.
In addition, similar legislation was subsequently
incorporated as subtitle D of title XXIX of H.R. 3304, the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, which
was enacted as Public Law 113-66 on December 26, 2013. The
National Defense Authorization Act only withdraws the 5,100
acres for the White Sands Missile Range, however, and not the
additional 37,600 acres for the buffer for the Dona Ana Range.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in
open business session on November 14, 2013 by a voice vote of a
quorum present, recommended that the Senate pass S. 753.
COMMITTEE AMENDMENT
The Committee adopted an amendment during its consideration
of S. 753. The amendment strikes section 1(c) of the bill as
introduced, which provided for the transfer of administrative
jurisdiction over a parcel of previously withdrawn land
covering approximately 2,050 acres from the Secretary of the
Army to the Secretary of the Interior, and inserts a new
subsection (c) revoking the withdrawal of the parcel, and
providing for its management by the Secretary of the Interior
as public land in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1(a) withdraws for parcels of public land totaling
approximately 42,700 acres from the operation of the public
land, mining, and mineral leasing laws.
Subsection (b) reserves the withdrawn land for use by the
Secretary of the Army for military purposes in accordance with
Public Land Order 833.
Subsection (c) revokes the withdrawal of a parcel of 2,050
acres previously withdrawn by Public Land Order 833.
Subsection (d) provides for the publication of a legal
description of the land withdrawn by subsection (a).
COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS
The following estimate of costs of this measure has been
provided by the Congressional Budget Office:
S. 753--A bill to provide for national security benefits for White
Sands Missile Range and Fort Bliss
S. 753 would require the Secretary of the Interior to
withdraw roughly 43,000 acres of federal land in New Mexico
from the operation of certain public land laws, including laws
that authorize mineral development and grazing on such lands.
Those lands would be used by the Army for military purposes.
The bill also would require the Secretary of the Army to
transfer administrative jurisdiction over about 2,000 acres of
land in the same area to the Department of the Interior.
Based on information provided by the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), CBO estimates that implementing the
legislation would have no significant impact on the federal
budget. Enacting S. 753 would reduce offsetting receipts, which
are treated as reductions in direct spending; therefore, pay-
as-you-go procedures apply. However, CBO estimates that any net
reduction in offsetting receipts would be negligible.
Some of the affected lands are currently used for cattle
grazing, and CBO expects that enacting S. 753 would cause BLM
to terminate existing grazing contracts. Based on information
provided by the agency, CBO estimates that terminating those
contracts would reduce offsetting receipts by less than $1,000
a year over the 2014-2023 period.
In addition, because the affected lands are already managed
by the federal government, we estimate that implementing the
legislation would not affect the costs of managing the lands.
Finally, CBO estimates that any additional costs to prepare the
legal description of the affected lands, as required under the
bill, would total less than $10,000, subject to the
availability of appropriated funds.
S. 753 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.
On June 12, 2013, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R.
1299, the White Sands Missile Range Security Enhancement Act,
as ordered reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources
on May 15, 2013. Both bills would withdraw federal lands in
southern New Mexico from the operation of certain public land
laws. S. 753 also would require the Secretary of the Army to
transfer administrative jurisdiction over certain lands to the
Secretary of the Interior. The estimated costs of implementing
the two bills are similar.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Jeff LaFave. The
estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION
In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following
evaluation of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in
carrying out S. 753.
The bill is not a regulatory measure in the sense of
imposing Government-established standards or significant
economic responsibilities on private individuals and
businesses.
No personal information would be collected in administering
the program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal
privacy.
Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the
enactment of S. 753, as ordered reported.
CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING
S. 753, as reported, does not contain any congressionally
directed spending items, limited tax benefits, or limited
tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the Standing Rules
of the Senate.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
The testimony provided by the Department of the Interior
and the Department of the Army on S. 753, at the July 30, 2013,
Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining hearing
follows:
Statement of Ned Farquhar, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Land and
Minerals Management, Department of the Interior
Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony on three
public land withdrawal bills, S. 753, S. 1169, and S. 1309. S.
753 seeks to achieve boundary solutions at White Sands Missile
Range (WSMR) and Fort Bliss in New Mexico. The Administration
supports S. 753, but would like to work with the Subcommittee
and the sponsor on technical modifications to the bill. S.
1169, the Limestone Hills Training Area Withdrawal Act, would
withdraw approximately 18,644 acres of public land for use by
the Department of the Army (Army) in Montana. The
Administration supports the continued use of the lands
identified in S. 1169 by the Army, but has concerns with the
provision related to the location and maintenance of mining
claims. We look forward to working with the Subcommittee and
the sponsor on modifications to address these concerns. S.
1309, the Military Land Withdrawals Act, was introduced at the
Administration's request. The bill reflects the
Administration's FY 2014 National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) legislative proposal for three public land withdrawals
in California and one in Montana. The Administration urges the
Senate to pass S. 1309 to support military use of the lands at
Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range (CMAGR), Naval Air
Weapons Station (NAWS) China Lake, Marine Corps Air Ground
Combat Center (MCAGCC) Twentynine Palms, and Limestone Hills
Training Area.
background
Public lands are managed by the Department of the Interior
(DOI) through the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Public land
withdrawals are formal lands actions that set aside, withhold,
or reserve public land by statute or administrative order for
public purposes. Withdrawals are established for a wide variety
of purposes, e.g., power site reserves, military reservations,
administrative sites, recreation sites, national parks,
reclamation projects, and wilderness areas. Withdrawals are
most often used to preserve sensitive environmental values and
major Federal investments in facilities or other improvements,
to support national security, and to provide for public health
and safety. Withdrawals of public lands for military use
require joint actions by DOI and the Department of Defense
(DOD). DOD has a number of installations, training areas, and
ranges that are located partially or wholly on temporarily or
permanently withdrawn public lands. Many of these withdrawals
support installations that are critical to the nation's ability
to provide for the readiness of the Armed Forces. Approximately
16 million acres of public lands are withdrawn for military
purposes.
There was no limit on the amount of public land that could
be withdrawn administratively at a single location for military
use until 1958 when the Engle Act (P.L. 85-337) became law. The
Engle Act requires an Act of Congress to authorize military
land withdrawals aggregating 5,000 acres or more for any one
defense project or facility. Similarly, there was no limit on
the time period of administrative withdrawals until 1976 when
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) (P.L. 94-
579) became law. FLPMA allows the Secretary of the Interior to
administratively make withdrawals aggregating 5,000 acres or
more for purposes other than military use, for a period of not
more than 20 years. Legislative military withdrawals have
traditionally included time limits, with renewal required every
15, 20, or 25 years, depending on the terms in the legislation.
DOI appreciates the importance of military installations
for the security of the Nation and supports the multiple
missions of our Armed Forces. We are proud to be able to offer
public lands to support military readiness, training, and
testing, and are proud to be able to assist the military in
meeting its mission needs. Throughout the country we have
established productive partnerships and other working
arrangements with the military and we intend to continue these
mutually beneficial arrangements. We are especially
appreciative of the military's stewardship of the withdrawn
lands they manage. These arrangements have worked out well for
all concerned and should continue.
The Administration believes that the traditional, periodic
review that is a part of the legislative withdrawal process is
vital to promoting the highest quality stewardship and
management of the public lands proposed for withdrawal in these
bills. This process provides opportunities for DOD and the
military branches to evaluate their continued use of the lands
and obtain the participation and assistance of DOI in sound
management, for DOI to ensure that the lands are being managed
in ways that could allow their eventual return to the public
domain for broader public use, and for the Congress and the
public to provide input and oversight.
s. 753--boundary solutions at white sands missile range (vvsmr) and
fort bliss
WSMR is a test range of approximately 2.2 million acres in
parts of five counties in southern New Mexico, making it one of
the largest military installations in the United States. WSMR
is contiguous to Fort Bliss to the south, which is used for
military training. The majority of the lands that comprise both
WSMR and Fort Bliss, over 2.4 million acres, are public lands
withdrawn and reserved for the use of the Army under Public
Land Order (PLO) 833 and by Public Law 106-65.
S. 753 seeks to achieve boundary solutions at WSMR and Fort
Bliss. First, the bill would withdraw and reserve approximately
5,100 additional acres for use by the Army at WSMR, to allow
for an additional buffer area between the current public access
areas and operations of several WSMR tenants, such as the NASA
White Sands Test Facility and the NASA Goddard Space Flight
Center Tracking and Data Relay Satellite Systems Facility. The
Administration supports the goal of allowing the use of the
lands by the Army. However, these lands receive significant
public use, mainly in the form of hunting and livestock
grazing. Because the introduced bill does not address grazing,
the reduction in the existing grazing permit and removal of any
authorized range improvements within these lands would be
carried out in accordance with BLM's grazing regulations at 43
C.F.R Part 4100.
S. 753 would also withdraw approximately 37,600 acres of
public lands from the operation of certain public land laws, in
order to establish a zone to buffer the noise, dust and
vibrations from the live fire training activities on the
adjoining Dona Ana tank gunnery and artillery range complex at
Fort Bliss. These lands would remain under the full management
of the Department of the Interior, but they would be withdrawn
from the public land laws, the mining laws, and the mineral
leasing, mineral materials, and geothermal leasing laws. The
Administration supports the withdrawal of these lands,
consistent with a similar provision included in the
Administration's FY 2014 NDAA legislative proposal.
Additionally, S. 753 would transfer to the Secretary of the
Interior administrative jurisdiction over approximately 2,050
acres of public lands previously withdrawn and reserved for the
Army's use under PLO 833. The lands are part of an area known
as Filmore Canyon, and are adjacent on two sides to the BLM's
Organ Mountains Area of Critical of Environmental Concern
(ACEC) Filmore Canyon is adjacent to the community of Las
Cruces and includes hunting opportunities and scenic lands that
are popular for year-round hiking. The BLM manages the Organ
Mountains ACEC for significant scenic values and endangered
wildlife species, and the ACEC contains cultural sites eligible
for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The
Administration supports the return of these lands to full
management by the Department of the Interior as part of a
cohesive boundary solution at WSMR and Fort Bliss. We would
like to work with the Subcommittee and the sponsor on technical
modifications.
s. 1169--limestone hills training area withdrawal act
The Limestone Hills Training Area consists of 18,644 acres
of public lands in Broadwater County, Montana that have been
used for military training since the 1950s. In 1984, the BLM
issued the Army a right-of-way formally permitting use of the
training area for military purposes. The current right-of-way
expires on March 26, 2014. The Montana Army National Guard is
the primary DOD user of the training area, which is also used
by reserve and active components from all branches of the
military services for live fire, mounted and dismounted
maneuver training, and aviation training. The withdrawal of the
Limestone Hills Training area is necessary because the BLM has
determined that it no longer has the authority to permit the
use of the lands for military maneuvers under a right-of-way
instrument.
S. 1169 would withdraw and assign general management of the
training area to the Army, but would keep management of grazing
and mineral resources with the BLM. This arrangement is
consistent with the Administration's FY 2014 NDAA legislative
proposal, and the Administration supports the goal of allowing
the use of the lands by the Army under a withdrawal and
reservation. However, the introduced bill contains a provision
related to the location and maintenance of mining claims that
is at odds with the Administration's legislative proposal, and
with which the Administration has concerns.
Section 4 of S. 1169 would legislatively expand certain
rights for mineral disposition or exploration. It would set a
new precedent for public land withdrawals by allowing the
opportunity to cure discrepancies in the original location or
the failure to maintain several hundred mining claims in the
Indian Creek mine area for the duration of the withdrawal. The
legislative language could be interpreted to allow mining
claimants to take in new land under existing claims, which
could impact land required for military training--including
live fire impact areas. By granting unique privileges to
certain mining claimants, this provision is contrary to the
normal operation of mining laws and regulations, which provide
equal treatment for all claimants who are similarly situated.
The Administration looks forward to working with the
Subcommittee and the sponsor on modifications to address these
concerns and on more technical changes to incorporate general
provisions from the FY 2014 NDAA legislative proposal.
s. 1309--the military land withdrawals act
S. 1309, the Military Land Withdrawals Act, represents the
Administration's legislative proposal to enact four public land
withdrawals as part of the FY 2014 NDAA. This proposal was
jointly prepared by DOD and DOI and represents extensive
discussions and consensus building between the two agencies to
achieve common goals. Presently, the two existing withdrawals
for NAWS China Lake, California, and CMAGR, California, enacted
in the California Military Lands Withdrawal and Overflights Act
of 1994 (1994 California Act) (P.L. 103-433), will expire on
October 31, 2014. Additionally, the Marine Corps seeks a new
withdrawal of public lands at MCAGCC Twentynine Palms,
California, to expand its training areas to support increased
requirements. Finally, the Army needs to convert its use of
public lands at the Montana Army National Guard, Limestone
Hills Training Area, from a BLM issued right-of-way to a
legislative withdrawal.
Unlike prior legislative withdrawals which were uncodified,
stand-alone provisions of law, the withdrawals made under S.
1309 would be codified in a new chapter of title 10, United
States Code. This would make the withdrawal process
substantially more efficient for both the Executive and
Legislative branches by providing commonality among the
withdrawal provisions, placing them in a location that is easy
to find and refer to, and, if used for future withdrawals,
reducing the need to reconsider and revise ``boilerplate''
provisions with each proposal. Also, this codification would
allow changes to withdrawal provisions without having to wait
the decades that might pass before the next withdrawal took
place. This new flexibility would greatly aid the ability of
DOD, DOI, and Congress to soundly manage withdrawn lands.
S. 1309 includes many general provisions applicable to all
four of the withdrawals. Among these are provisions for: the
development of maps and legal descriptions; access
restrictions; changes in use; authorizations for non-defense-
related uses; management of range and brush fire prevention and
suppression; on-going decontamination; water rights; hunting,
fishing, and trapping; limitations on extensions and renewals;
application for renewal; limitation on subsequent availability
of lands for appropriation; relinquishment; interchanges and
transfers of Federal lands; delegability of certain
responsibilities by the Secretary of the Interior; and immunity
of the United States. Most of these general provisions are
similar, if not identical, to previously applied provisions in
existing withdrawal statutes.
The interchanges and transfers provision is included to
address boundary management issues involving both withdrawn
public lands and acquired real property. For example, there is
a need for boundary adjustment on the northern side of CMAGR to
address uncertainties and resource management conflicts
associated with the BLM-managed Bradshaw Trail. The Bradshaw
Trail is popular with off-highway vehicle users, and is, in
part, maintained by the local government, in coordination with
the BLM. However, the trailhead and some of the trail's length
currently crosses acquired real property administered by the
Department of the Navy (Navy) and the Marine Corps. In the case
of the expansion of MCAGCC Twentynine Palms, the Navy will
likely seek to purchase various inholdings within the proposed
withdrawal boundary. It could be beneficial to both departments
if these inholdings could be converted, by interchange or
transfer, to BLM public lands. In any case, the interchange
provision is limited to acre-for-acre in order to avoid
expanding the footprint of DOD lands. The transfer provision is
limited to the Engle Act 5,000 acre limit (total) for any one
installation over the 25-year life of the withdrawal. These
provisions are designed to allow for small administrative
adjustments to promote sound land management without impinging
upon the role of Congress in managing Federal lands.
Naval Air Weapons Station (NAWS) China Lake, California
NAWS China Lake consists of over 1.1 million acres of land
in Inyo, Kern, and San Bernardino Counties, California, of
which 92 percent are withdrawn public lands. Under a Memorandum
of Understanding between the Navy and DOI, the Commanding
Officer of NAWS China Lake is responsible for managing the
withdrawn land. The installation is home to approximately 4,300
DOD personnel and its primary tenant is the Naval Air Warfare
Center Weapons Division. The current 20-year legislative
withdrawal expires on October 31, 2014.
The 25-year renewal included in S. 1309 is modeled on the
current successful management scheme instituted as part of the
1994 California Act, which allows the DOD and DOI to combine
their unique capabilities and assets for the benefit of the
resources and the public by cooperatively managing natural and
cultural resources, recreational resources, grazing, wild
horses and burros, and geothermal resources. For example, the
Navy manages the wild horses and burros on-the-ground at NAWS
China Lake and the BLM manages the gathering, holding and
adoption of the animals. In addition, the BLM and NAWS China
Lake have a unique agreement to collaboratively produce
geothermal energy at the installation, which currently produces
over 150 megawatts of power.
Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range (CMAGR), California
The CMAGR was established in 1941. The range consists of
about 459,000 acres in Imperial and Riverside Counties,
California, of which approximately 227,000 acres are withdrawn
public lands under the co-management of the Marine Corps and
the BLM. The remaining lands are under the administrative
jurisdiction of the Department of the Navy. The two sets of
lands form a checkerboard pattern of administrative
jurisdiction. The Marine Corps primarily uses the lands for
aviation weapons training, including precision guided munitions
and Naval Special Warfare training. The current 20-year
withdrawal is set to expire on October 31, 2014.
S. 1309 provides for a 25-year renewal and would allow the
BLM and Navy to institute the same type of cooperative
management that has been successful at China Lake. The
Chocolate Mountain range is home to a number of species such as
desert tortoise and big horn sheep, and contains a wide range
of archeological resources.
Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (MCAGCC) Twentynine Palms,
California
MCAGCC Twentynine Palms currently consists of 596,000 acres
of land in San Bernardino County, California. In 1959,
approximately 443,000 of those total acres were
administratively withdrawn and reserved for the use of the Navy
under PLO 1860. DOD is now seeking to expand this installation
with the withdrawal of approximately 154,000 acres of public
lands adjacent to MCAGCC. The added training lands would create
a training area of sufficient size with characteristics
suitable for the Marine Corps to conduct Marine Expeditionary
Brigade (MEB) level training. MEB training requires sustained,
combined-arms, live-fire and maneuver training of three Marine
battalions with all of their associated equipment moving
simultaneously toward a single objective over a 72-hour period.
S. 1309 meets the important training needs of the Marines,
and, recognizing that there will be impacts to public access,
also includes a unique management structure to mitigate some of
the loss of access to lands popularly used for off-highway
vehicle (OHV) recreation. The bill provides for continued,
year-round public access to the western third of the Johnson
Valley OHV area. In addition, a shared use area of about 43,000
acres of the withdrawn lands would be available for OHV use for
ten months out of the year, when there is no active military
training.
Limestone Hills Training Area, Montana
As previously stated, the legislative withdrawal of the
Limestone Hills Training area is necessary because the BLM has
determined that it no longer has the authority to permit the
use of the lands for military maneuvers under a right-of-way
instrument. Under S. 1309, general management of the training
area would be assigned to the Army, but the BLM would retain
management of grazing and mineral resources for the lands
withdrawn and reserved.
conclusion
Thank you for inviting our testimony on S. 753, S. 1169,
and S. 1309. The Department of the Interior, which has always
been part of the Nation's national defense team, is committed
to supporting military missions and training needs, while
protecting natural resources and other traditional uses of the
public lands. I would be happy to answer your questions.
Statement of the Honorable Katherine G. Hammack, Assistant Secretary of
the Army (Installations, Energy, and Environment)
Thank you, Chairman Manchin, Ranking Member Barrasso and
other distinguished Members of the Committee for the
opportunity to provide comments on S. 1169, legislation to
withdraw public lands in Montana for use by the Army, and S.
753, legislation to withdraw public lands in New Mexico.
limestone hills training area withdrawal act of 2013
Senate Bill 1169, the Limestone Hills Training Area
Withdrawal Act, would withdraw and reserve approximately 18,644
acres of federal land that comprises the Limestone Hills
Training Area (LHTA) for use by the Army, and assign primary
management of the property from the Department of the Interior
to the Department of the Army for a 25-year period.
The lands comprising the LHTA are public domain lands,
currently under the control of the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM). The legislation would enable continued training on the
land by the Montana National Guard (MTNG) and other active and
reserve components of the armed forces that have used the
property for training purposes for several decades. In order
for the Army to continue occupying the property, the land must
be ``withdrawn from the public domain,'' which can only be
accomplished by an Act of Congress. Unless legislation is
passed, the Army's current authority to use the property will
end in March 2014.
The LHTA is operated by the MTNG and is their only large-
scale live fire and maneuver training area. It is a critically
important training asset for the MTNG, used by approximately
3,800 Guardsmen annually, for diverse training involving small
arms, crew-served weapons, mortars, and demolition activities.
The LHTA represents a realistic, open training environment
within a reasonable travel distance for most Guardsmen and for
equipment, which is maintained off site. This regional training
asset allows us to avoid the expenditures of time, money, and
fuel that would result if training had to be located elsewhere.
The LHTA is also used by the active and reserve components
of the other branches of the military and is made available in
some cases for use by other federal, state, and local agencies.
Some 10,000 personnel from other services use the site each
year. Many of those personnel are from special operations units
who are preparing for rotations in Afghanistan and other
forward locations. The LHTA is especially valuable because of
the variety of training conducted there, which is reflected in
the number and diversity of organizations that train there.
There are a number of other, non-federal activities that
occur at the LHTA, and the Army is respectful of the multiple
uses of the property. We are particularly proud of the
collaborative relationship among the MTNG, the BLM, and the
other stakeholders in the area. The Army closely coordinates
with the operators of an active limestone mine within the
withdrawal area. The Army firmly supports allowing existing
mining claims to proceed to development in accordance with
previously approved plans of operations, and we are confident
this can occur. The MTNG plans meticulously to ensure that
training and mining operations are held at a safe distance, and
that any unexploded ordnance (UXO) is removed from the mining
area. Training activities are also deconflicted with grazing
operations, wildlife habitat, and use of two public roads that
traverse the property. There is a proven track record of
accommodating multiple uses of the property while fulfilling
military training and mission needs.
The MTNG is party to an existing agreement with the BLM and
with Graymont Western US, Inc., the current mine operator. This
agreement specifies the procedures that the parties follow to
coordinate and deconflict their respective activities. As
provided for in the legislation, the Army is prepared to enter
into a new agreement to update those procedures during the
withdrawal period. We do not foresee any difficulty in
maintaining procedures to ensure that training and readiness
are maintained while accommodating the needs of other parties.
While the Army supports withdrawal of the property to
enable its continued use for military training, the Army has
significant concerns with certain language in the bill that
would legislatively expand certain rights for mineral
disposition or exploration. The Army opposes inclusion of
Subsection 4(a)(3), which would provide an opportunity for
certain mining claimants to amend or relocate mining claims and
to reinstate expired claims. This provision would give
unprecedented latitude to these claimants, which could impact
land required for military training--including live fire impact
areas. This would severely limit the ability of the Army to
plan and conduct training on the property.
The Army supports allowing existing mining claims to
proceed to development in accordance with previously approved
plans of operations and in accordance with applicable law and
regulation. However, the Army strongly objects to this
Subsection as it would grant particular mining claimants the
ability to operate without regard for the withdrawal and
reservation. There is no clear precedent for this provision,
which stands in opposition to the normal purpose and effect of
military land withdrawals. By granting unique privileges to
certain mining claimants, this provision is also contrary to
the normal operation of mining laws and regulations, which
provide equal treatment for all claimants who are similarly
situated.
The LHTA is an important asset for the readiness of the
armed forces. If the land is not withdrawn, Limestone Hills
will be returned to the BLM and the MTNG would be forced to
conduct its primary training events at other locations.
Changing training venues could markedly increase the costs to
the MTNG over current expenditures. Additionally, UXO
contamination would need to be mitigated if the range were
closed. Since funding for UXO removal from active ranges is
controlled and prioritized differently from funding for cleanup
of closed ranges, if the range is closed, Army priorities and
schedules for UXO removal would be affected. We appreciate the
effort to keep this important training asset open and
available.
Noting the strong objection to Subsection 4(a)(3), we
support S. 1169 with the exclusion of that provision. The
Department of Defense has submitted a legislative proposal to
the Congress for consideration that would also address the
withdrawal requirements for LHTA. The proposal, introduced as
S. 1309, is fully coordinated and agreed to within the
Administration, and would provide urgent and necessary
authority to continue training and operations.
S. 753, a bill to provide for national security benefits for White
Sands Missile Range and Fort Bliss
The other legislation I would like to discuss is S. 753,
which involves the withdrawal of 42,700 acres of public lands
in New Mexico and reservation of 5,100 of those acres for use
by the Department of the Army. The bill would also transfer
administration of 2,050 acres from the Army to the Department
of Interior. These lands are directly adjacent to Fort Bliss
and the White Sands Missile Range (WSMR). As the two largest
military installations in the United States, Fort Bliss and
WSMR consist of nearly 5,000 square miles of land that
accommodates military training, research, development, and test
and evaluation. In addition to Army test activities, WSMR hosts
several other federal tenants, including NASA and the National
Reconnaissance Office (NRO).
A portion of the withdrawal, totaling 37,600 acres, is
adjacent to the Dona Ana tank gunnery and artillery range
complex at Fort Bliss. Training in this location can generate
significant noise, vibration, and dust, which can all migrate
off the installation. Army analysis has determined that noise
levels occurring in the area to be withdrawn are higher than is
recommended for various categories of use and development. The
Army is concerned that residential and commercial development
may occur in that area. The legislation would ensure that
incompatible development does not occur in that area. In doing
so, the legislation would establish an enduring buffer for the
live-fire ranges in the Dona Ana training area.
A separate 5,100 acre portion of the land that would be
withdrawn by this legislation is adjacent to tenant operations
at WSMR: the NASA White Sands Test Facility; the NASA Goddard
Space Flight Center Tracking and Data Relay Satellite Systems
facility; and the NRO Aerospace Data Facility--Southwest. These
operations are co-located and have special security and safety
requirements. The land set aside for their use, while large
enough to handle the mission, no longer resides in a remote
location. As with many locations in the southwest, this area
has seen a large increase in population in recent years. The
facilities sit close to the border of a public access area, and
a number of security incidents in the area have highlighted the
value of having a controlled stand-off area. This legislation
would reserve for military control a one-mile stand-off area
between those tenant activities and the public access area,
which would improve the security for these facilities.
The bill would also return administration of a small area
at Fort Bliss from the Department of the Army to the Department
of the Interior. The 2,050 acre parcel, previously withdrawn
for military use, would be transferred to the BLM. This parcel
has relatively limited training value for Fort Bliss due to its
limited access from the installation. The Army does not object
to the return of this land to BLM, but we offer one technical
comment on the provision. Since the parcel was originally
withdrawn by Public Land Order 833, a partial legislative
revocation of that Public Land Order would ensure a clear
interpretation of congressional intent.
The Army has worked cooperatively with the Bureau of Land
Management and other neighbors and stakeholders in addressing
land use issues in this area. We appreciate the cooperation and
interest of all parties who support the various missions at
Fort Bliss and WSMR. The Army supports this legislation, which
would protect those important national security missions.
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss these topics, I
look forward to any questions you have.
changes in existing law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no
changes in existing law are made by S. 75, as ordered reported.